Quote from: Jim Matson on November 09, 2009, 01:21:45 PM
I would say that Augie has a slightly easier bracket than does Illinois Wesleyan or Wheaton.  I think Chicago is good this year, especially at home.  Wash U is also a strong team to get by.

Stevens Point will be the best team that Augie faces, but they are down a bit this season compared to past seasons.

Stevens Point is definitely down. Can't lose one of the most dynamic duos in the region--Weisse and Prawat--and expect to be as dangerous. When I saw them early in the season they were a longball team. That can work in the postseason, though. Teams will throw up extra attackers to deal with the packed-box defense, and UWSP can catch them by finding one of their several athletic forwards. It's just not so connected up top anymore.

Quote from: Jim Matson on November 08, 2009, 03:30:37 AM
I think Wheaton has the upper hand for spot number two since the Illinois Wesleyan "loss" will be looked at by the committee as a tie.  So in the tourney, Wheaton has a tie, while IWU has a tie and a loss.  That said, I do believe that we'll see all three teams in the tourney.

Hosts are usually the higher seeded teams.

Yep, the really important thing was Wash U getting the UAA auto qualifier despite losing to Chicago. (Unbelievable that Case was able to tie both Rochester teams.)

I'd say it's a definite that Chicago, Wheaton and Ill. Wesleyan get at-large berths now, and it will be in that order. I don't see the Central getting a fourth team -- There's not really a credible candidate outside of Calvin, who will be on the board but probably not make it.

The problem with predictions this year is that we don't really know how the regional realignment will affect the national process.

My bet is that Chicago hosts a bracket with Wheaton, unless the NCAA decides to send either to Augustana.

Well, I wouldn't bank IWU's chances solely on yesterday. Remember that the result goes down as a tie, not a win. If they beat Augie, obviously they are in. If they lose (and not in PKs) they will actually be worse off for the week than Wheaton. And Wheaton still holds that advantage head to head (1-0-1).

Keep in mind that advancement in conference tournament is not a criterion for NCAA selection. That's not to say the CCIW can't get three teams. That might just depend on circumstances from these realigned regions, if Wash U wins the UAA and other conference tourneys around the nation. Root for the favorites is all I'm saying.

Ill. Wesleyan advances to the finals over Wheaton on PKs (3-1), after finishing tied at one.

Some notes:

Wheaton was the better team in the second half and overtimes, but they just didn't look as efficient as they have in the past. I've seen the Thunder play twice this year, and both times, Taryne Lee was off compared to her extremely high standards. She did rip off one sudden cross along the ground late, but she was not sharp with her shot.

Ali Koppelman had a chance to finish things with a breakaway in OT, but she didn't pick out a spot and her hard, dead-center shot was popped out for a corner.

Officially it goes down as a tie, which is the best the loser of this game could hope for. In my opinion, Wheaton has to root hard for Augustana in the CCIW finals. If Ill. Wesleyan pulls off the upset and Chicago gets a win or draw (and Wash U thus doesn't pick up the UAA), then Wheaton would be No. 4 in line in the Central. With 21 bids across eight regions—and the Central this year being a two-conference region—that's a very tight chance.

If Augustana wins, then Wheaton will probably be ahead of Ill. Wesleyan because of last week's result (and a significantly tougher schedule).

Quote from: WLCALUM83 on November 03, 2009, 05:12:00 PM
Calvin and Kzoo are going to penalty kicks!

And Kzoo won 3-1 in the shootout. Astounding stat from the Calvin recap: The Knights are just 1-6-1 (how do you get a draw?) in shootouts. In fact, if Calvin doesn't make the tournament this year, they'll have lost their final game in a shootout their last FIVE years. Doesn't seem possible.

I'm curious as to how Calvin's move to the Central Region might have affected it this year. Certainly they couldn't pull it off against the region's best teams: They lost consecutive games to Chicago, Wheaton and Wash U. One of the biggest criticisms in the past has been that they have run away with an MIAA conference that didn't challenge them. Calvin certainly had the strength of schedule this year, but it looks like the Knights will be just a step below the postseason.

Quote from: jellybelly on October 16, 2009, 02:18:12 PM
Can anyone explain for me how a team gets a yellow card?  Just curious.  Kind of new to this, but haven't seen that before.

I think this original question was about how a "team" itself gets cautioned. I've only seen that used to warn the bench, i.e. the head coach.

Quote from: hugenerd on February 22, 2009, 10:48:49 PM
I noticed that Jack Anderson didnt play for CMU today after playing 30 minutes on Friday night.  Anyone who went to the WashU game on Friday know about an injury or any other reason he might not be playing?

Chicago's videocast discussed his absence today ... he was out with a concussion.

With d3hoops.com doing the game from a neutral perspective, I think the homer broadcast has its place today. So long as its not biased, it's good to have the emotion and excitement.

Quote from: martin on January 18, 2008, 09:45:22 PM

Chicago announcers are still talking about Matt Corning's breakway dunk.

The visual proof: http://maroon.uchicago.edu/sportsreport/?p=275

Quote from: newtonnancy on March 10, 2007, 06:47:28 PM

Bach won't like this, but I am picking Kean to beat NYU. I think their Athleticism and speed will hurt NYU.....if NYU wins I would excpect that the NYU Home Court Advantage  would send them to the foul line for at least 1o more opportunities then Kean...

I have no idea if NYU will win, but do you really think that any team has a noticeable advantage in athleticism and speed against NYU? They were by far the best in those areas of all the women's teams I saw this season. Definitely tops in the UAA.

Clarification completely accepted, nescac hoops. I was hoping that's what you meant, as most people here would agree that the vast majority of athletes deserve tons of credit for what they do. You just can't always tell on message boards...

To be fair to Nancy, she's criticized her own team plenty, so it's not so much the consistency that's the issue but rather the tone. I love analyzing these teams too, and I definitely evaluate them critically. I just like to be a bit more neutral and tempered about it.

Quote from: Marty Peretz on March 05, 2007, 10:29:22 AM
Just a quick note on the Wash.U crowds of this past year from someone who hasn't missed a home game...Attendence figures are very tough to report because, well, they don't sell tickets. Even for the NCAA games, Wash. U students (who make up a clear majority of the crowd at all home games) weren't charged for tickets. Basically what happened is that because the NCAA needs an official count, the ticket counters count each person through the door, but that becomes quite hard to do when 15-20 students roll through en masse with nothing more than student ID's. You simply can't count all those. Also, a lot of students enter through alternate entrances or later in the game. So, Friday's announced crowd of 1524 was, in actuality, a lot more like 2200-2300 and Saturday's announced crowd of 833 was a lot more like 1200. The official Friday crowd of 1524 was considerably larger than the UChicago crowd of a week earlier, which was announced as 1907. Also, the 745 seasonal average is misleading in that because the UAA plays Friday night and then at noon on sunday, friday night crowds are considerably larger than sunday crowds. WashU has been a very tough place to play all year. Ask anyone who played in the field house; the bears didn't lose at home all season.

This is so easy to solve for NCAA games. Print out tickets and give each student with an ID one. There, you've solved your problem.

Quote from: nescac hoops on March 04, 2007, 10:16:39 PM
The UAA team that should be ashamed of themselves would be yours, U Chicago. Talk about letting a good lead/season go to waste....

Sorry to call you out, but this is just ridiculous. Aside from one game, there was no shame in those losses. Close games against some very good teams. They did not give up or coast. They were a competitive team that came out to a great start and was probably too young to finish it off. There's no waste in that if you don't specifically set the postseason as your goal... yes, you want to get there, but I wouldn't be ashamed of what was still a good season. That's how it sometimes works in a top-tier league.

I'm not defending the other comment about Brandeis being ashamed of its performance, but you don't have to go sliding through the mud either.

Quote from: BachDog on March 01, 2007, 10:44:04 AM
   About the Maroons, Nancy. I really like their team. I think the #1 (on WBCA, not D3) was preliminary, but they are an explosive team, when they're on. What do you think was the catalyst to the downfall?? Was it too hyped up? They are so dangerous (ask Wash. U.) it would have been great if they could have turned it around.

There are a few reasons,  but one you cannot underestimate is how dependent this team was on its freshmen. Don't get me wrong: They were great and a big part of the reason the Maroons were so good this year. But you're talking about a conference with some of the nation's best coaches, who can expose flaws of inexperience. Chicago lost five of seven games by five points or less, so you're not talking about a team lacking talent but rather the closing touch.

Definitely ask Wash U if you want to get a feel of how dangerous Chicago was. The two games this season were grind-it-out battles, and the Bears took the last affair on some incredibly classy performances by Schell and Parker. Both teams deserved a win, but Wash U earned the victory with some great late play.

On Chicago's side, that showed that were a tournament-worthy team this year (in terms of quality, not necessarily credentials) and that another season learning their ever-developing offense should prove wonders.

Quote from: Pat Coleman on February 27, 2007, 08:28:26 PM
It was kind of hard to justify ranking NYU highly right out of the box, considering they went 18-8 last year, lost in the first round of the NCAA Tournament on an neutral floor, and played one Top 100 opponent before Jan. 5.

Once they got into the decent teams on their schedule, they moved up appropriately.

Point taken, but it also highlights one of the problems with polls. I didn't think much of the Violets until I saw them. After that, I saw them as the best team in the UAA.

If everybody could have seen them, I'm guessing they would have gotten the proper respect earlier.