Little known facts and D-III Tidbits

[Say What?]

Thought I would start a thread on fun facts and interesting tidbits at the D-III level. And because I’ve been questioned on how I view certain teams scheduling practices, what better place to start. Since the inception of the NCAA D-III final seven after the 01-02 season six years ago, seven teams have led the pack. I have done a little research over the last week and here are the facts on those teams making the final seven plus a couple more for good measure. (Statistics are for games against D-II and D-III teams during the regular season over the last six years.)
1. Middlebury – Finalist six times, overall record 115-13-7 (.878), 39 non-conference games – 29-10-0 (.744) against teams with a combined winning percentage of .711 with 5 :) of those against teams with a losing record
2. Manhattanville – Finalist six times, overall record 121-17-8 (.856), 34 non-conference games – 19-9-6 (.647) against teams with a combined winning percentage of .726 with 3:) of those against teams with a losing record
3. Elmira – Finalist five times, overall record 111-16-8 (.852), 53 non-conference games – 40-8-5 (.802) against teams with a combined winning percentage of .608 with 18:cool: of those against teams with a losing record
4. Gustavus – Finalist five times, overall record 117-24-9 (.810), 41 non-conference games – 22-16-3 (.573) against teams with a combined winning percentage of .708 with 1:eek: of those against teams with a losing record
5. Plattsburgh – Finalist four times, overall record 119-13-8 (.879), 58 non-conference games – 46-8-4 (.827) against teams with a combined winning percentage of .619 with 18:cool: of those against teams with a losing record
6. Bowdoin – Finalist four times, overall record 107-22-10 (.806), 42 non-conference games – 24-12-3 (.678) against teams with a combined winning percentage of .680 with 7:) of those against teams with a losing record
7. Stevens Point – Finalist four times, overall record 111-23-13 (.799), 59 non-conference games – 45-9-5 (.805) against teams with a combined winning percentage of .561 with 21 ;) of those against teams with a losing record
8. RIT – Finalist one time, overall record 105-35-8 (.736), 36 non-conference games – 22-12-2 (.639) against teams with a combined winning percentage of .527 with 19;) of those against teams with a losing record
9. St Thomas – Finalist one time, overall record 103-37-10 (.720), 42 non-conference games – 18-22-2 (.452) against teams with a combined winning percentage of .654 with 8:) of those against teams with a losing record
10. Superior – Finalist one time, overall record 96-42-9 (.684), 58 non-conference games – 43-13-3 (.754) against teams with a combined winning percentage of .489 with 29 :o of those against teams with a losing record

So what kind of questions/comments can be raised from these numbers? I’ll stir the pot with these!!
• Obviously the best way to get into the finals is to win your post season conference tournament. (Check out the top seven’s tournament records)
• Scheduling weak non-conference opponents is not a way to prepare your team for post season competition. (RIT, Superior - 51% of non-conference games against teams with losing records)
• Obviously the NCAA should increase the number of teams to 8. D-I gets 8 teams with 32.5 participants while D-III gets 7 with 44 participants. (that one slipped)
• The larger the conference the fewer non-conference games to schedule and vice versus ---duh!!!
• Winning programs find a way to schedule tough winning opponents even when they have a large number of non-conference games. (Elmira, Plattsburgh, Point)
• Some teams have the financial backing of the administration, alumni and parents which provide for proper facilities, equipment, travel and coaches. (you pick)
• Some teams/coaches/fan forum poster’s use the lack of the previous point as an excuse for their weak schedules. (you pick again)
• Some teams schedule tough but don’t play that way. (St Thomas)
• Some teams from weak conferences only schedule winning programs to prepare for post season play. (Gustavus, Manhattanville – 4 out of 75 non-conference opponents with a losing record)
• Some teams from strong conferences prepare even more by scheduling strong non-conference teams. (Middlebury, Bowdoin, Plattsburgh, Elmira – 75% of non-conference games against opponents with winning records)
• Scheduling non-conference cup cakes creates phony player statistics and individual play and is not conducive to winning post season team play.
• Because of their winning tradition, their coaching (Houle, Nemetz-Carlson, Carroll, Mandigo) and their “SCHEDULING”, it is hard for me to fathom that at least six of the top seven will not be in the final seven year in and year out.

Comments, cheap shots, thoughts……..anyone??????

[Da Big Bad Cow]

So what kind of questions/comments can be raised from these numbers? I’ll stir the pot with these!!


• Winning programs find a way to schedule tough winning opponents even when they have a large number of non-conference games. (Elmira, Plattsburgh, Point)

they find a way? it's not like it's a difficult thing for them to do...those top teams want to play other top teams. what benefit would middlebury get from playing castleton and st mikes? it would absolutely kill their strength of schedule and should they stumble in the nescac it would make it tougher to get into the ncaa's.

every year there are weaker programs who don't have the resources of the top teams who struggle to fill their schedule with a full allotment of games because the top teams don't want to play them, even if it's geographically a logical game to play. often times weaker programs aren't even permitted to travel more than a few hours to play non-con games further limiting their opportunities.

you can't blame the top programs for wanting to compete against each other, but you also can't blame the weaker programs who are frustrated with their plight as it pertains to scheduling.


• Some teams have the financial backing of the administration, alumni and parents which provide for proper facilities, equipment, travel and coaches. (you pick) and this the single biggest reason that these programs will continue to be at the top of the heap year after year after year. weaker programs may surge to the middle of the pack for a time...and middle of the pack programs may surge near the top for a year or two...but the teams that have consistently been at or near the top are there to stay.

i would argue however that financial commitment on the part of the institution doesn't necessarily mean they are going to have 'proper coaches'. There are a few top teams out there with weaker coaching situations, and a handful of weaker programs who have some pretty solid coaches.



• Some teams/coaches/fan forum poster’s use the lack of the previous point as an excuse for their weak schedules. (you pick again)

as an excuse? it is fact. if you are a weaker program that lacks proper and sufficient funding, you run into these problems time and again. top teams don't want to play you because it does nothing to help their program. your administration wont let you travel more than a couple hours to play. there's a few teams, particularly out east who have had to resort to scheduling other weak LEAGUE opponents for non-con games because they haven't been able to get games outside of there conference because there are a lack of opportunities.


• Some teams from weak conferences only schedule winning programs to prepare for post season play. (Gustavus, Manhattanville – 4 out of 75 non-conference opponents with a losing record)
• Some teams from strong conferences prepare even more by scheduling strong non-conference teams. (Middlebury, Bowdoin, Plattsburgh, Elmira – 75% of non-conference games against opponents with winning records)

again, they do this because they can.


• Because of their winning tradition, their coaching (Houle, Nemetz-Carlson, Carroll, Mandigo) and their “SCHEDULING”, it is hard for me to fathom that at least six of the top seven will not be in the final seven year in and year out.
youre right that those teams will remain at or near the top year after year. but it's purely because of the commitment made to their program by their respective athletic departments and the resources they are provided with. who is coaching those programs is not nearly as important. look at manhattanville. you had a good coach in seeley, a weaker coach in kirnan, and an inexperienced coach in mcauliffe...yet manhattanville is at the same level they have always been. and as far as scheduling goes, those teams do benefit from playing each other, and it certainly helps them come the post season, but it's not as though they have had to go out and fight to get those games. those teams only want to play each other, so thats what they do.

[imafan]

4. Gustavus – Finalist five times, overall record 117-24-9 (.810), 41 non-conference games – 22-16-3 (.573) against teams with a combined winning percentage of .708 with 1 of those against teams with a losing record


Sorry, but this is wrong in regards to non-conference opponents with losing records. Gustavus played Hamline in 06-07, Lake Forest and St Olaf in 05-06, and St Marys in 03-04 all of which had losing records. They played Hamline, Olaf and St Marys in regular season, but also played them in non-conference games late in the year.

[Say What?]

4. Gustavus – Finalist five times, overall record 117-24-9 (.810), 41 non-conference games – 22-16-3 (.573) against teams with a combined winning percentage of .708 with 1 of those against teams with a losing record


Sorry, but this is wrong in regards to non-conference opponents with losing records. Gustavus played Hamline in 06-07, Lake Forest and St Olaf in 05-06, and St Marys in 03-04 all of which had losing records. They played Hamline, Olaf and St Marys in regular season, but also played them in non-conference games late in the year.

Quoting myself, "(Statistics are for games against D-II and D-III teams during the regular season over the last six years.) I did not include post-season play. LF was 11-10-4 in league play and Gustavus did not play Hamline, St Olaf or St Mary other than league and post season (which I excluded). And for the record Hamline was 15-9-3 overall in 06-07 and St Mary's was 15-9-2 in 03-04 (only playing Gustavus twice in league). St Olaf was 12-13-0 during the regular season and lost to Gustavus in the post season. If I would have included post season games, I would have added probably a couple more non-conference losing records but then I would probably have added another 10 wins against teams with winning records. So your point is what? I'm sure I made mistakes somewhere, so keep digging. If you are concentrating on finding something wrong with the numbers, then you missed the whole point of the post. :) Go figure:p

[goldp]

imafan wrote:
Sorry, but this is wrong in regards to non-conference opponents with losing records. Gustavus played Hamline in 06-07...

So you missed the surgence of Hamline last year? (I would write resurgence but the Pipers had never 'surged' before). Yes, they were 10-6-2 in the MIAC and 15-9-3 overall. You must have just assumed they sucked last year. ;)

[imafan]

Quoting myself, "(Statistics are for games against D-II and D-III teams during the regular season over the last six years.) I did not include post-season play. LF was 11-10-4 in league play and Gustavus did not play Hamline, St Olaf or St Mary other than league and post season (which I excluded). And for the record Hamline was 15-9-3 overall in 06-07 and St Mary's was 15-9-2 in 03-04 (only playing Gustavus twice in league). St Olaf was 12-13-0 during the regular season and lost to Gustavus in the post season. If I would have included post season games, I would have added probably a couple more non-conference losing records but then I would probably have added another 10 wins against teams with winning records. So your point is what? I'm sure I made mistakes somewhere, so keep digging. If you are concentrating on finding something wrong with the numbers, then you missed the whole point of the post. :) Go figure:p


You're right, I was looking at the entire season, my comment on St Mary's was the wrong year (should have been 04-05, and the Hamline comment came from looking at the wrong schedule (I clicked on the wrong Hamline link - men's)), oopps. I think you put a lot of time and effort into this which is way more than i would do to stir up conversation.

I completely agree with Cow, some money and commitment from administration is not going to guarantee a great coaching staff. Some very good programs can almost run themselves once the team is on the ice. Some coaches can recruit very well for various reasons, but may not provide the best insight to getting the players to achieve their maximum potential.

[gojackets]

• Some teams schedule tough but don’t play that way. (St Thomas)



I don't really think thats a fair comment. From 02-04 the Tommies were the pride of the MIAC, from 04 to 06 Gustavus was on top, with close competition from UST for number 2 and last season the tommies dropped to number 3 and didn't perform well out of conference, so with the exception of last year...they have alway put up good results.

Scheduling weak non-conference opponents is not a way to prepare your team for post season competition. (RIT, Superior - 51% of non-conference games against teams with losing records)
• Some teams from weak conferences only schedule winning programs to prepare for post season play. (Gustavus, Manhattanville – 4 out of 75 non-conference opponents with a losing record)


Thats tougher than you make it sound when there is the disparity between the two leagues. I can't speak for RIT cuz i'm not as familiar with the eastern leagues, however, last season 6 of the 10 MIAC teams had losing records, opposed to 1 of the 6 NCHA teams. Of course the NCHA teams are going to end up playing more teams with losing records than the MIAC teams out of conference. I"m not gonna get into the hole argument again, but there just aren't that many quality hockey teams in the west, especially outside of the NCHA. Since the start of the 06 season the MIAC is 33-63-6 out of conference with Gustavus and Hamline getting 20 of those 33 wins.

[Say What?]

I don't really think thats a fair comment. From 02-04 the Tommies were the pride of the MIAC, from 04 to 06 Gustavus was on top, with close competition from UST for number 2 and last season the tommies dropped to number 3 and didn't perform well out of conference, so with the exception of last year...they have alway put up good results.


Thats tougher than you make it sound when there is the disparity between the two leagues. I can't speak for RIT cuz i'm not as familiar with the eastern leagues, however, last season 6 of the 10 MIAC teams had losing records, opposed to 1 of the 6 NCHA teams. Of course the NCHA teams are going to end up playing more teams with losing records than the MIAC teams out of conference. I"m not gonna get into the hole argument again, but there just aren't that many quality hockey teams in the west, especially outside of the NCHA. Since the start of the 06 season the MIAC is 33-63-6 out of conference with Gustavus and Hamline getting 20 of those 33 wins.


A couple of minor points:
1) I was discussing non-conference schedules and how they affect post-season play.
2) St Thomas did well in the MIAC for the years you stated but that is not to the "point" of my post.
3) St Thomas's non-conference record was 01/02 - 2-5-0, 02/03 - 3-4-0, 03/04 - 2-4-1, 04/05 - 4-2-1, 05/06 - 5-2-0 and 06/07 - 2-5-0, which is to the "point" and why I made the comment.
4) You build up St Thomas and then add in Gustavus and Hamline as quality West teams who the superior NCHA teams can play. Then I go to Superior's schedule and see one game scheduled against those three. I take it that the bus ride from Superior to Morehead is easier than to the Twin Cities??:rolleyes:
5) Doesn't appear that Stevens Point has as much difficulty in finding winning programs to schedule (or at least someone that gives them some competition) compared to Superior.
6) Finally, as I stated in one of my first post, I'd bet good money that all Coach Laughlin had to do was call Coach Carroll and ask for another game and he would have had it pronto. Think Gustavus wants to play St Mary's and St Olaf a third time. I don't think so!!!


As I also commented, you can make all the excuses you want about your teams schedule, but if you look at it over a period of years, and then look at what other teams in both the east and west have done with their schedules in similar circumstances, you can draw the conclusion in your situation, that the jackets will always be that step or five away from the big dance.:)

[rochhockey1950]

wow this is interesting. As an RITTIGER fan just coming into the D-3 West league I have to say out of the top contenders over the last 5 or so years nobody plays a weaker schedule than Manhattnville. I know its not there fault but they get more cremey puffs than anyone.
I am not saying this to attack them but something I observed following them as my team used to be in their division or section of play

[Say What?]

wow this is interesting. As an RITTIGER fan just coming into the D-3 West league I have to say out of the top contenders over the last 5 or so years nobody plays a weaker schedule than Manhattnville. I know its not there fault but they get more cremey puffs than anyone.
I am not saying this to attack them but something I observed following them as my team used to be in their division or section of play

Again, not to beat a dead horse, but my intent was to say you can’t control your league play schedule, so what are the top teams doing with their schedules to get to the post season. Sure the ECAC-E and MIAC are pathetically weak conferences but the two teams that historically get to the big dance out of those conferences at the end of the year, rectify that by pumping up their non-conference schedules. That is not wishful thinking that is a fact. Just see my initial post, no Chatham’s, no Eau Claire’s, no additional games against St Kate’s or MIT, just four games between Gustavus and Manhattanville out of 75 that they actually scheduled outside of conference play against teams with loosing records in the past six years. Sure a weak overall schedule but a way above average non-conference schedule. Now as a RIT fan, look at the results of your non-conference schedule the past six years and tell me with a straight face it matches up with either!!! And except for one year, where has RIT the third week of March. I guess that would be home wouldn’t it.

ps:By the way, wasn't RIT in the ECAC-E up until this year? I wouldn't be criticizing Manhattanville to much. You played the same weak conference teams to.:D

[rochhockey1950]

True but theres one difference. RIT was NEVER a contender until last year. We were one of those so-so weaker teams in the East.

[gojackets]

3) St Thomas's non-conference record was 01/02 - 2-5-0, 02/03 - 3-4-0, 03/04 - 2-4-1, 04/05 - 4-2-1, 05/06 - 5-2-0 and 06/07 - 2-5-0, which is to the "point" and why I made the comment.


I'm willing to bet with confidence, without doing any research that if you looked at the NC records for all teams in the MIAC over that same time frame..that none of them with the exception of gustavus would have winning non-conference records.



As I also commented, you can make all the excuses you want about your teams schedule, but if you look at it over a period of years, and then look at what other teams in both the east and west have done with their schedules in similar circumstances, you can draw the conclusion in your situation, that the jackets will always be that step or five away from the big dance.:)

I do find it amusing that you went to all that trouble to try to prove your point about Superior. They are the only NCHA team St Bens is playing this year. Someone has to play the bad teams, and i'm not fully convinced St Bens is a bad team this year. I'm sure you know what Coach Laughlin and Coach Carroll were thinking when they made their respective schedules but i'm sure you know better than they do. The truth of the matter is with the exception of 04-05, the 'Jackets have been serious contenders in the Laughlin era. Last season he scheduled tougher non-conference games, 2 against GAC, 1 vs Elmira and 2 with St Marys, (which has always been a top half MIAC team)...and that didn't help him get over the hump in double OT. Last year UWS and SP were very even teams, 2 years ago SP was better (superiors only 4 losses of the season were to SP), 3 years ago Superior wasn't in it, 4 years ago SUperior was better but SP got that lucky goal in double OT to put them into the NCAA's.

This being said if you go with historical evidence (like you pointed out). Stevens Point has represented the NCHA in the NCAA tournament the past 5 seasons, it should have been 6 of the last 7.but they got screwed in 01-02. Of those 5 seasons they went to the FF 4 times. They have been the elite team from the west...and maybe the nonconference schedule has something to do with it maybe not..it still hasn't helped them beat anybody out east..anybody elite that is (middlebury, plattsburgh, elmira)

As much as I despise the Pointers during the regular season I fully back them once the NCAA's get here and they go represent the west in the Eastern Tournament. Its like me enjoying the Packers success this year despite the fact that I hate them. I'm happy for them to be doing so well so maybe Favre will just go away :P

[Tweedle Dee]

Did you make the non-conference teams record based on the current year or the previous year?

[Say What?]

[QUOTE]I'm willing to bet with confidence, without doing any research that if you looked at the NC records for all teams in the MIAC over that same time frame..that none of them with the exception of gustavus would have winning non-conference records.

I was looking at the top teams and what they do to prepare for the post season. If you want to actually do some research to support a point you are making, be my guest. If not, just making flippant remarks doesn't get you very far in my book.


I do find it amusing that you went to all that trouble to try to prove your point about Superior.

Don't flatter yourself, I looked at winning programs of which Superior just happened to be one. I could have left them out and then you would have insinuated that I was leading a conspiracy against them.

They are the only NCHA team St Bens is playing this year. Someone has to play the bad teams, and i'm not fully convinced St Bens is a bad team this year.

Okay I'll give you this one. Superior gets an A+ for being nice to the little people. Only problem is, that won't count for anything at year end.
The truth of the matter is with the exception of 04-05, the 'Jackets have been serious contenders in the Laughlin era.
Serious contenders that made it to the final seven just 1 time. Thanks for making my point.
Last season he scheduled tougher non-conference games, 2 against GAC, 1 vs Elmira and 2 with St Marys, (which has always been a top half MIAC team)...and that didn't help him get over the hump in double OT.
So you try something one year and it doesn't work and therefore you revert to a schedule that never worked? Makes perfect sense!?!?!
4 years ago SUperior was better but SP got that lucky goal in double OT to put them into the NCAA's.

I'm not sure I understand your rational. You stated Superior was superior but got beat by a "lucky" bounce. However, time and time again you rip Gustavus as the weak sister to Stevens Point after their games in which Gustavus dominates Stevens Point in all facits except on the scoreboard. You sound like Micky talking about Neumann. (Oops that slipped!):p
still hasn't helped them beat anybody out east..anybody elite that is (middlebury, plattsburgh, elmira)
So I guess Stevens Point should just except the inevitable, schedule and beat up on weak teams, and not try to get better by playing the best competition they can find. Memo to Ninnemann: Let gojacket and Laughlin put your schedule together next year, you will get to go on vacation a couple weeks sooner!!!:)

It has gotten to the point where:I Refuse To Have A Battle Of Wits
With An Unarmed Person.
By the way, thanks for giving me the negative pub!!! It means a lot to me.

[Say What?]

Did you make the non-conference teams record based on the current year or the previous year?

All data was current year.

[Scruff]

I'd like to dispute your dismissal of the Coach's role in program and scheduling. Coaches build a reputation for integrity and coaching ability to get better funding and recruits. Smart recruits will go to a school for education and to play for the right Coach, therfore reinforcing a successful program. The program does not run itself. Although there are certainly exceptions, good coaches allow good players to flourish, players do not make the coaches, as anyone coming out of the OWPHL will probably confirm, having been on both ends of the fence.

[Tweedle Dee]

All data was current year.

SO if you went by the "current year" record how are you sure that the team inteded to schedule them since they were weak. Can the people making the schedule see the future. Since a good team the previous year can in theory have a bad "current year" can mean the other team scheduled them hoping to play them as the stonger team.

and on a bit of a sidenote why did you take out D-1 games.

[Da Big Bad Cow]

I'd like to dispute your dismissal of the Coach's role in program and scheduling. Coaches build a reputation for integrity and coaching ability to get better funding and recruits. Smart recruits will go to a school for education and to play for the right Coach, therfore reinforcing a successful program. The program does not run itself. Although there are certainly exceptions, good coaches allow good players to flourish, players do not make the coaches, as anyone coming out of the OWPHL will probably confirm, having been on both ends of the fence.



you are welcome to your opinion but it seems pretty clear that you don't have a very solid understanding of the landscape of women's hockey at the collegiate level. It all begins with what each program is handed by their respective athletic departments. You won't find a single top rated team at D1 or D3 that is underfunded (i'm sure every coach always would like more) relative to the teams in the middle and bottom of the pack. By the same token you won't find teams at the bottom that are well funded and given all the resources they need from their athletic department.

you can't compare it to the PWHL it's not even close to the same thing. at the NCAA level you have some coaches driving bentleys and some coaches driving kias. if you put kevin houle at Cortland his team isn't going to be appreciably better than what Cortland is right now, unless they kicked up their commitment to their program and give him some resources to work with. If earl utter goes up to Platty, they still win 25+ games and are in the NC hunt.

[gojackets]

[QUOTE=gojackets;3435809]

I was looking at the top teams and what they do to prepare for the post season. If you want to actually do some research to support a point you are making, be my guest. If not, just making flippant remarks doesn't get you very far in my book.


By the way, thanks for giving me the negative pub!!! It means a lot to me.

I genereally do research before i post...just not going to do it for something I already know the answer too. I didn't give you negative anything at least not any time in the near past.

[Say What?]

SO if you went by the "current year" record how are you sure that the team inteded to schedule them since they were weak. Can the people making the schedule see the future. Since a good team the previous year can in theory have a bad "current year" can mean the other team scheduled them hoping to play them as the stonger team.

and on a bit of a sidenote why did you take out D-1 games.

You are correct. I could have changed how I looked at a lot of things. I could have ignored ’06-’07 non-conference schedules and added in ’00-’01 non-conference schedules, which would move you towards what you are describing. But when you go back that far, it gets a little more difficult to find the data. I also could have deleted from the listed teams their wins and losses against their non-conference opponents and the wins and losses the non-conference opponents had against the listed teams to get to a clean win loss record. I could have done a lot of things different but then it took me long enough just to gather this information. As for D-I games, I excluded them as they have no affect on selection to post season play. Personally I probably would do a few things differently if time permitted but it does not. All and all though I believe the data shows fairly conclusively that to be among the best at the end of the year, you have to find a way to schedule the best during the year.