I am so happy about the reversal of attitude toward sports by the Williams administration. I talked with a coach (not basketball) who told me that he was stunned when, at a meeting of coaches, an administration official announced that "excellence" is what they wanted from every team. The official when on to explain that "excellence" meant being near the top, or at the top of the league standings most years. The promise was made that the coaches would be provided with every tool needed to make this happen.
This is a gigantic turnaround. The nicest way I can describe the administration's attitude in the past has been benign neglect. Without institutional support for athletics, nothing is possible, with support everything is possible.

There is good news for Williams fans coming from the Williams administration. There has been a distinct change in the attitude of the Administration toward winning. After a long period of indifference, if not outright hostility to sports, there are a number of tangible steps being taken to improve all sports. This is apparently due to the need to raise huge amounts of money for the complete overhaul of nearly all indoor sports facilities. Cost estimates I have heard start at $500 million. The Administration seems to feel that they can't raise the money without winning a lot more than they have in the last few years. Basketball seems to be a prime beneficiary. This is really good news. Basketball had suffered through a period where other priorities of Williams were greatly diminishing the ability to recruit enough high quality players. That period seems to be over. I look for men's basketball to improve very quickly. Go Ephs!

Oh boy, what happens to a school (Williams) that takes few to no athletic transfers?

I wonder how much not taking athletic transfers will hurt schools that effectively don't take them. Williams seems to be there, and maybe others in our league.

I seem to want to write about basketball today. I was thinking about why winning programs seem to keep winning and weaker programs seem to struggle to get better. Certainly there are a few factors: first, the level of institutional support. Does the college or university give the basketball program the players and support necessary to be good. Second, coaching, including recruiting and actual coaching. I have asked a lot of coaches the question of how much winning and losing is the result of recruiting, and how much is coaching. The answers varied a bit, but all were between 70-90% recruiting over coaching. The average was around 80% I would guess. Recruiting, of course, is a combination of the coach convincing good players to come, and admissions admitting them. A third factor, mostly overlooked, is the fact that good teams get to practice and play games for many more weeks each year. Using Williams and Trinity as examples, this year Williams' season ended on February 14th, with our win over Amherst. Trinity's season ended yesterday, March 21st. That gave Trinity five more weeks of practice, and seven more games. Last year Trinity had four more weeks of practice and seven more games. Taken over a four year cycle, that is 4-5 more months of practice for a player in the program, and many more games. I think this is a somewhat hidden reason good programs tend to stay good and weak have trouble rising.

As a very long time observer of Williams basketball, it is my view that truly great seasons are about making the Final Four. Sure, there are big goals short of that, like the NESCAC championship, making the NCAA tournament, and in our case, winning the Little Three, or winning 20 games. There are lots of smaller goals as well. For example, Mike Maker always made it a goal for his teams to make more foul shots than our opponents takes. Now my comments are all from the point of view of a fan. I have learned that coaches have different perspectives. Coaching is their career. Their relationship with their players, past and present, means so much to them, other factors are very important to them beyond winning and losing. The fan usually just wants to win, no matter what. As a fan, that's where I am. As a friend of the coaches, my view changes. I am writing as a crazy fan.

I am very pleased for our players and coaches when we get to the round of 16, or 8. However, I reserve the term "great season" for one where we get to the Final Four. You in really rarified air at the Final Four. Winning it all is great, so is getting to the final game, but just getting there defines greatness for me. It is so hard to get there. Anything more is just the cherry on top of the chocolate sunday. Trinity has done it three times in a row now. That is real greatness in a program.

Getting to the final four three seasons in a row makes this Trinity group the best in the NESCAC era, IMHO. They are just so tough to actually beat. My little brother was a good player for Trinity, so I'm never going to hear the end of this. They have won one championship already, and a second doesn't seem unlikely.

I feel like Trinity's offense is triggered by their defense. You can seem to play better than Trinity for huge periods of the game and, because of 5-8 minutes, lose by 15-20. A few live ball turnovers, offensive rebounds, and timely shots, and you are done. Great defensive team, "good enough" offensive team.

I recall a first round Williams game in Mike Maker's era where we beat Husson in OT. This was basically a 1-16 matchup. We then went to the final 4. Sometimes funny things happen in playoff games. It rarely has anything to do with the coach panicking!

Bates got screwed!

What are the chances of all 5 teams making it through the first game? The first weekend?

This late in the season, injuries play a huge part.

At the half, Tufts is playing quite well, but Trinity is so disruptive. When they get live ball turnovers, they go right for the jugular.

Quote from: SpringSt7 on February 24, 2026, 06:54:10 PMI have no issue with Cuevas but the more time goes by the more strongly I feel about Vetter POY. We can pretend like that Trinity team is absolutely loaded with offensive talent but it really isn't. Ayles and Davis are nice role players but nothing more yet. We talk Lazarre up a lot and he's probably worthy of a 2nd team all league spot but that is more defense than offense. Neither he or Okorougo make anyone better offensively or really make the defense work. Vetter is the straw that stirs the drink offensively, sets their entire tone as a leader, etc, two year captain. Has the ball in his hands at the end of the game and is the most likely to come through (see: national championship winning 3 with 10 seconds remaining)

He is my POY and it really has nothing to do with Cuevas or anyone else. I just think he is the most deserving and the best player

Vetter for POY is probably the choice of fans who believe that the most important player on the best team should get the award. He is the obvious leader of Trinity, and a very fine player, on one of the best, if not the best team.

To me, the question is, what do the coaches think the award is - the POTY or the MVP. The best player vs the most important player. The most important player (to his team) is often not the best player.