Oh yeah, I'm sure the "Selection Committee" is aware of the injury status of some player in Stevens Point, WI

Quote from: ShineTime on May 12, 2022, 10:29:10 PM
Are the Pointers and Warhawks locks to make regionals no matter how Point does the rest of the tournament or does Point need to win at least 1 more time? Their SOS isn't the greatest and I don't care what anyway says injuries matter to the committee and if Casey Pickering isn't healthy that's a huge knock on the Pointers. It would be nice to see 3 WIAC teams in regionals but only if it were to mean the Pointers are getting shipped to a different regional.

 Not quite the fire you were hoping for I'm afraid

Quote from: Ralph Turner on May 12, 2022, 05:36:59 PM

Quote from: BigSpotScott on May 12, 2022, 04:39:50 PM
Where does this rank among UWW's worst losses in recent memory?

Ranks high enough possibly to light the fire that sends UWW on a title run...

Where does this rank among UWW's worst losses in recent memory?

Quote from: AllStar on May 14, 2018, 03:57:31 PM
Bracket

Where does loser of game 5 go if they aren't eliminated?

Quote from: bleedpurple on May 10, 2018, 11:20:43 PM

Quote from: Ralph Turner on May 10, 2018, 09:47:11 PM

Quote from: bleedpurple on May 10, 2018, 09:11:36 PM

Quote from: BigSpotScott on May 10, 2018, 12:23:36 PM

Is anyone else surprised by IIT's performance this year? I figured they win 2 conference games max. I know they are leaving the conference, but for a team that wasn't even NCAA last year, they seem to be going decent - especially pitching which is where I'd expect a new WIAC team to struggle. Interested in thoughts.

Good point on where their wins are coming from. I'm still impressed by their pitching though.
Platteville and Stout have been the WIAC bottom two since Superior left.  They usually win between 4 and 6 games each.  This year they were worse than usual going a combined 3-29 in the WIAC (if you remove their results against IT).

IT was 4-4 against Platteville and Stout.  They are 1-11 vs UW-W, LaCrosse, and Stevens Point, with four games remaining against UW-0. So far, I think the only real surprise was their win against LaCrosse.

Respectfully, UW W,LC & SP would dominate 30 of the 40 conferences in D-3.

Agreed. I guess that's why I don't think the results are particularly surprising. I wasn't trying to dis IT. From what I had heard about the IT program, splitting with the 2018 versions of Platteville and Stout and struggling against the rest is pretty much what I would have expected.

Quote from: badgerwarhawk on May 09, 2018, 10:08:42 AM
Out of conference:

Illinois Tech (9-7):  Beloit (W 4-3), Mass. College of Liberal Arts (L 4-5, W 7-5),  Olivet (L 1-6), Cazenovia (W 5-2). Fitchburg State (W 4-0, W 1-0), Keene State (L 6-14),  Milwaukee School of Engineering (W 7-0, L 1-5), Wisconsin Lutheran (w 11-7, W 9-3), Carthage (L 3-13, L 0-15), Chicago (L 13-18), Arora (W 5-3)

La Crosse: (9-5):  St Thomas (W 2-0), Southern Maine (W 12-11), Spalding (L 2-4), College of New Jersey (L 2-3), SUNY Brockport (W 9-7), RIT (W 5-0), lllinois Wesleyan (W 18-5), Benedictine (L 4-5), Webster (W 4-2), Concordia - Chicago (L 3-8, L 8-14), St Scholastica (W 6-4, W 14-11), St Thomas (W 6-2)

Oshkosh (13-2): Wabash (L 4-5), Transylvania (W 9-1, L 10-14), St Thomas (W 4-3, W 6-3), Ripon (W 7-1), St Scholastica (W 4-2), Lawrence (W 15-1), Washington & Jefferson (W 11-1), Grinnell (W 8-0,), Benedictine (W 13-3), Thomas (W 20-0), Wis Lutheran (W 11-2), Milwaukee School of Engineering (W 12-2, W 10-7)

Platteville (6-10): Aurora (L 1-3), Olivet (L 6-7), Spalding (L 1-11), Anderson (L 5-9), Spalding (L 2-12), DePauw (W 15-13), Fonbonne (L 3-13, L 3-5), Rose Hulman (L 3-20), Chicago (L 6-7), Rose Hulman (W 8-6), Belhaven (L 5-10, W 10-8, W 15-12), Millsaps (W 8-7), Edgewood (W 6-4)

Stevens Point (8-4): St Olaf (W 3-1, W 9-6), Western New England (L 1-2), Washington & Jefferson (L 4-5, W 6-0), Keuka (W 20-0), St Thomas (L 1-6, W 5-2), Colby (W 4-2), Colby (W 10-5), Concordia (L 2-3, W 9-3)

Stout (3-10): Augsburg (L 0-3, L 5-8), Hamline (L 2-9, W 6-2), Edgewood (W 15-9), St Michael's (L 2-3, L 2-4), North Park (L 7-16), Lakeland (W 9-5), Augustana (L 3-5), SUNY-Plattsburg (L 7-10), Bethel (L 5-7, L 3-12)

WARHAWKS (11-2): Babson (W 5-3), Hope (W 11-1), Washington & Jefferson (W 8-1), Lawrence (W 9-4), Grinnell (W 16-4), St Olaf (L 3-6), St Thomas (L 0-3), Ripon (W 15-3, W 11-5), St Scholastica (W 13-1), St Norbert (W 22-8), Concordia-Wi (W 7-0)

Through 4/08
Overall: 59-40 .595


O'Sullivan and Muir, a pair of freshman, combined to strike out 11 as the WARHAWKS defeated Concordia-Wi 7-0.  O'Sullivan picked up his third win allowing 3 hits in the first five innings with 5 strikeouts and Muir struck out 6 in 3 hitless innings in relief.  Gruetzmacher finished the final inning.  Offensively Doud led the way with 3 hits and 3 RBI.  Wary had a pair of hits and RBI.  Schrader and Aldridge, who scored 3 times, each drove in a run. 


It looks like it all comes down to this weekend.  I don't see Oshkosh losing to Illinois Tech so the WARHAWKS will most likely need to take at least 3 games in La Crosse to gain the outright claim to the conference championship.

Is anyone else surprised by IIT's performance this year? I figured they win 2 conference games max. I know they are leaving the conference, but for a team that wasn't even NCAA last year, they seem to be going decent - especially pitching which is where I'd expect a new WIAC team to struggle. Interested in thoughts.

Quote from: Ralph Turner on May 07, 2018, 01:32:58 PM
The bracket will be announced on May 14,2018.

Hosted by St Scholastica

Great stadium. Hopefully the weather isn't as cold as it can get there this time of the year.

Quote from: Baseball Geek on May 07, 2018, 07:34:50 PM
And Oshkosh takes two from Point.

Assuming Oshkosh wins all four against IIT, that makes the Whitewater/Lacrosse series much more interesting. AQ or not, no team is saying that winning the conference doesn't matter to them.

I doubt it will happen, but if UWO wins out and UWW splits with UWL, who wins the tie-breaker?

Quote from: bleedpurple on April 26, 2018, 05:20:44 PM

Quote from: BigSpotScott on April 25, 2018, 11:05:09 PM

Quote from: bleedpurple on April 08, 2018, 12:32:46 AM

Quote from: TitanDoubles on April 07, 2018, 11:23:59 PM

Quote from: badgerwarhawk on April 07, 2018, 07:25:24 PM
We haven't kept it a secret and have been doing it long enough that at the least the conference commissioner should know about it.  I don't know the rules that well but I'm doubting your understanding.  We simply purchased advertising from Fox Sports.  I suspect Oshkosh could do the same.

WARHAWKS take two ten run rule shortened games with Stout 14-4, 11-1 today.  Bryden goes 4x5 with 4 RBIs and Jones gets 8Ks and the win in game one.  Rentz allows 4 hits and strikes out 6 while Sontoro gets 3 hits and a pair of RBI in game two.   

A balmy 33 was the best it got today.  Two more tomorrow.

It's a violation. You can't recruit athletes via advertisements on TV. If you could I guarantee you would see every D1 school doing it. Especially something like UW-Milwaukee basketball.

I'd be interested in knowing how you are going to stand behind your guarantee. Or are those empty words? It is absolutely not a violation. Is UW-W ahead of the curve on this? Yes. As usual. There are restrictions on current student athletes' roles in advertisements. That's why former athletes are participating. it would be great if you would produce the rule being violated or admit you are wrong. I predict you will do neither.

I ran across this thread and found this very interesting. What raised my suspicion is that in the hundreds of ads I've seen for colleges on ESPN, BTN, etc. during college sports games, not once have I seen highlights of sports and/or mention of national championships and athletics. When athletes are featured, they talk about academics. The ads are truly to get people to go to the colleges as students, not student-athletes.

That brought me to this website:
https://web3.ncaa.org/lsdbi/search/bylawView?id=103405#result
Specifically, 13.4.2.1
"The publication of advertising or promotional material, by or on behalf of a member institution, designed to solicit the enrollment of a prospective student-athlete is not permitted."

Now, for those of you who attended UWW, "permitted" is another word for "allowed". So unless you truly believe that UWW showing highlight after highlight, and having former players and current coaches talk about winning national championships is somehow NOT targeted at prospective student-athletes, then I guess UWW is in the clear. However, I think people who don't "bleed purple" would find this highly suspicious if not illegal.

BigSpotScott,
Since I am used to hanging around UW-W guys, I recognize that you are probably the most intelligent human being I have ever attempted to communicate with, so I admit to being fairly intimidated as I try to construct sentences properly in this post. I know you will correct me, but I love learning, so being educated by a genius is an honor. You cite the following sentence:

"The publication of advertising or promotional material, by or on behalf of a member institution, designed to solicit the enrollment of a prospective student-athlete is not permitted."

Because of the use of the singular in referencing the student-athlete, it appears to me that this rule prohibits using promotional material to recruit "a prospective student-athlete" rather than student athletes in general.  If the NCAA wanted to ban all advertising, they certainly could have done so without the phrase "designed to solicit the enrollment of a prospective student-athlete".

So if a school is recruiting "Tommy Smith from DePere", they can't run an ad in the DePere Journal saying, "Tommy, the Titans love you and need you, please enroll at UW-0".  That would be advertising designed to solicit the enrollment of a prospective student-athlete.

Sorry about that miscommunication. If you click my link and read the entire rule, you will see the NCAA shift to using athletes (plural) in their examples. Clever rebuttal though (seriously).

Touching on another point, I don't believe the NCAA or the WIAC stand to gain anything from enforcing this rule. UWW is probably the most recognizable D3 college in the country, so the WIAC definitely has nothing to gain as this would only hurt their prestige. On the other hand, the NCAA has much more pressing issues like D1 player recruitment, and making sure I can never buy an new College Football video game. Besides, the ad is obviously ineffective as we see UWW's dynasty coming to an end.

The reason I reintroduced this topic is twofold. One, I love irritating UWW fans who are easily butt-hurt. And two, I really wanted a better explanation than "they must have done their research, so it must be okay" or "they haven't gotten in trouble, so it's clearly legal" (Paraphrasing here). Under that logic, Hillary Clinton's email server was within the law.

Go Warhawks!

Quote from: bleedpurple on April 08, 2018, 12:32:46 AM

Quote from: TitanDoubles on April 07, 2018, 11:23:59 PM

Quote from: badgerwarhawk on April 07, 2018, 07:25:24 PM
We haven't kept it a secret and have been doing it long enough that at the least the conference commissioner should know about it.  I don't know the rules that well but I'm doubting your understanding.  We simply purchased advertising from Fox Sports.  I suspect Oshkosh could do the same.

WARHAWKS take two ten run rule shortened games with Stout 14-4, 11-1 today.  Bryden goes 4x5 with 4 RBIs and Jones gets 8Ks and the win in game one.  Rentz allows 4 hits and strikes out 6 while Sontoro gets 3 hits and a pair of RBI in game two.   

A balmy 33 was the best it got today.  Two more tomorrow.

It's a violation. You can't recruit athletes via advertisements on TV. If you could I guarantee you would see every D1 school doing it. Especially something like UW-Milwaukee basketball.

I'd be interested in knowing how you are going to stand behind your guarantee. Or are those empty words? It is absolutely not a violation. Is UW-W ahead of the curve on this? Yes. As usual. There are restrictions on current student athletes' roles in advertisements. That's why former athletes are participating. it would be great if you would produce the rule being violated or admit you are wrong. I predict you will do neither.

I ran across this thread and found this very interesting. What raised my suspicion is that in the hundreds of ads I've seen for colleges on ESPN, BTN, etc. during college sports games, not once have I seen highlights of sports and/or mention of national championships and athletics. When athletes are featured, they talk about academics. The ads are truly to get people to go to the colleges as students, not student-athletes.

That brought me to this website:
https://web3.ncaa.org/lsdbi/search/bylawView?id=103405#result
Specifically, 13.4.2.1
"The publication of advertising or promotional material, by or on behalf of a member institution, designed to solicit the enrollment of a prospective student-athlete is not permitted."

Now, for those of you who attended UWW, "permitted" is another word for "allowed". So unless you truly believe that UWW showing highlight after highlight, and having former players and current coaches talk about winning national championships is somehow NOT targeted at prospective student-athletes, then I guess UWW is in the clear. However, I think people who don't "bleed purple" would find this highly suspicious if not illegal.

Quote from: BigPoppa on April 16, 2018, 07:11:54 PM

Quote from: Jim Dixon on April 16, 2018, 12:05:17 PM
One problem is that there is not a good option to make the WIAC a seven team conference unless another UW school picks up baseball.  I would actually suggest the NCAA to make all six team conferences since seven just seem like an odd number (well it is odd but...)

The only consequence could be the ASC splitting in two for two pool a bids.  The USA South, with 14 members, can already do this and get two A bids.

Who is the most logical team to move into the WIAC? ANy chance UW-Parkside would drop from D2 into D3? The are the state's only D2 program, and UW Milwaukee is the state's only D1. How is this possible? I think part of the reason Wisconsin's D3s are so good nationally is that they often get D1/D2 type kids who fall into their laps as very few D1 schools recruit Wisconsin (Arkansas seems to always grab a kid or two).

Very few is a gross understatement. Especially with technology and all of the showcases, D1 teams have it easier than ever to recruit Wisconsin. This statement maybe was valid in the 90s and early 2000s, but today, if you're good, they'll find you.