|
|
Post by gman2 on Jan 13, 2009 23:46:27 GMT -6
Came across this quote from Steve Antrim:
" Antrim said the biggest disappointment in his coaching tenure was the snub the school received after finishing 23-4 in 1992-'93. The Panthers were not invited to the NCAA Tournament or the NIT.
"That made me realize, if you have a hyphen there by your name, you've got to play for an automatic bid, or they're not going to take you," Antrim said.
So, do you think this still is true. Do you think UWM will ever get an at large invite being a hyphenated school?
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 14, 2009 0:33:02 GMT -6
|
|
|
|
Post by PantherU on Jan 14, 2009 0:58:08 GMT -6
And people think the name isn't important...
|
|
|
|
Post by Hack on Jan 14, 2009 8:57:41 GMT -6
It's easy to look at a 23-4 record and say UWM got snubbed and point to a simple excuse like a hyphen prevented a NCAA or NIT berth. However, let's delve into that 23-4 record, shall we? WESTERN MICHIGAN
| W 84-75
| NORTHEASTERN ILLINOIS
| W 94-78
| at Alcorn State
| W 91-76
| UW-PARKSIDE
| W 98-71
| at Wisconsin
| W 77-72
| NORTHERN ILLINOIS
| W 79-71
| WESTERN ILLINOIS
| W 92-71
| at Western Michigan
| W 74-63
| at Utah
| L 62-96
| at Northern Illinois
| W 82-57
| ALCORN STATE
| W 94-80
| FAIRFIELD
| W 75-59
| at Western Illinois
| W 76-67
| at New Hampshire
| W 86-70
| UW-GREEN BAY
| W 75-68 OT
| CAL STATE NORTHRIDGE
| W 78-65
| SACRAMENTO STATE
| W 96-44
| MISSOURI-KANSAS CITY
| W 73-57
| at Chicago State
| W 78-60
| at Missouri-Kansas City
| L 77-99
| CHICAGO STATE
| W 65-64
| at Northeastern Illinois
| L 86-91 OT
| at Cal State Northridge
| W 75-74
| at Southern Utah
| L 80-81 OT
| SOUTHERN UTAH
| W 66-56
| at Sacramento State
| W 78-76
| at UW-Green Bay
| W 61-48
|
Not exactly a bunch of world-beaters on that list are there. And you can't say beating UW was much of a "quality" win in terms of getting a berth ... they were 14-14 that year. uwgb was having a down year in the midst of their successful run under Dick Bennett ... they finished 13-14. Point out one quality win on that list. You can't ... at least not quality wins the way the committee looks for them. Losing 3 of its last 8 games didn't help UWM, either. I don't mean to take anything away from that team or its players ... it would've been fun to see UWM in the Mid-Con that year against better competition with a much more realistic chance of getting to the NCAAs. Maybe you could say UWM was snubbed for an NIT berth, but that was before the field had expanded to 40. And then, you are brought back to losing 3 of the last 8 games when there was no room for error. No independent in its third year at the Division I level with that kind of resume was getting an at-large berth into the NCAAs ... hyphen or no hyphen. |
|
|
|
Post by uwm97 on Jan 14, 2009 9:04:30 GMT -6
If you're a D-1 school with a D-1 schedule, and you finish 23-4, there is no reason to not be invited to the NIT. Period.
|
|
|
|
Post by Hack on Jan 14, 2009 9:13:40 GMT -6
If you're a D-1 school with a D-1 schedule, and you finish 23-4, there is no reason to not be invited to the NIT. Period. That's where you can make a solid argument about being snubbed ... being denied an NIT spot. Especially considering UW got in the NIT that year. |
|
|
|
Post by uwm97 on Jan 14, 2009 9:30:05 GMT -6
That's where you can make a solid argument about being snubbed ... being denied an NIT spot. Especially considering UW got in the NIT that year. That's what stuck in our craw that year. We beat Madison at their place, they finish 14-14, and they get a bid and Milwaukee didn't? If memory serves, Milwaukee had the highest winning % of any D-1 school that year. |
|
|
|
Post by milwsport on Jan 14, 2009 10:33:16 GMT -6
Looking at that list of games, though, there are teams on it that weren't even D-1 at the time (and maybe like Northeastern Ill still aren't.)
I don't think it was the hyphen so much as it was the strength of schedule. Yes it seems unfair but going 14-14 as Big Ten team probably weighed more heavily in the minds of the selection committee then going 23-4 (and losing three of your last eight) against a slate of mostly nobodies.
That doesn't mean I like the hyphen, I don't. I also don't like calling us Milwaukee Panthers. That sounds like a minor-league pro franchise. UWM Panthers works just fine for me.
|
|
|
|
Post by Hack on Jan 14, 2009 10:43:25 GMT -6
Looking at that list of games, though, there are teams on it that weren't even D-1 at the time (and maybe like Northeastern Ill still aren't.) Yep, there are a few D-II teams (or lower) on there ... UW-Parkside, Sacramento State, Southern Utah. Not sure about UMKC. And NE Illinois doesn't even HAVE a team anymore.... dropped all sports in 1998 or some time around then. |
|
|
|
Post by uwmpanther on Jan 14, 2009 10:57:45 GMT -6
Hack did well to put the legend of the 92/93 team a bit into perspective.
With regards to the NIT issue, the selection criteria are more about revenue than athletic achievement. Had UWM been selected for the NIT as the home team, they would have drawn a good crowd for a home game (and probably sold out the MECCA if matched up against Wisconsin). But as a road team, Wisconsin had much higher draw potential than UWM.
BTW, UWM had the best record of non-NCAA tournament teams, and thus were the biggest snub (based on record alone) that year. But as posters before me correctly pointed out, there were really no high quality wins, three bad losses, and the one "good" loss was with a 34 point margin. That team was fun to watch, though.
|
|
|
|
Post by panthersteve on Jan 14, 2009 11:35:27 GMT -6
Being an independent and not affiliated with a conference we had no clout.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 14, 2009 12:03:48 GMT -6
It's easy to look at a 23-4 record and say UWM got snubbed and point to a simple excuse like a hyphen prevented a NCAA or NIT berth. However, let's delve into that 23-4 record, shall we? WESTERN MICHIGAN
| W 84-75
| NORTHEASTERN ILLINOIS
| W 94-78
| at Alcorn State
| W 91-76
| UW-PARKSIDE
| W 98-71
| at Wisconsin
| W 77-72
| NORTHERN ILLINOIS
| W 79-71
| WESTERN ILLINOIS
| W 92-71
| at Western Michigan
| W 74-63
| at Utah
| L 62-96
| at Northern Illinois
| W 82-57
| ALCORN STATE
| W 94-80
| FAIRFIELD
| W 75-59
| at Western Illinois
| W 76-67
| at New Hampshire
| W 86-70
| UW-GREEN BAY
| W 75-68 OT
| CAL STATE NORTHRIDGE
| W 78-65
| SACRAMENTO STATE
| W 96-44
| MISSOURI-KANSAS CITY
| W 73-57
| at Chicago State
| W 78-60
| at Missouri-Kansas City
| L 77-99
| CHICAGO STATE
| W 65-64
| at Northeastern Illinois
| L 86-91 OT
| at Cal State Northridge
| W 75-74
| at Southern Utah
| L 80-81 OT
| SOUTHERN UTAH
| W 66-56
| at Sacramento State
| W 78-76
| at UW-Green Bay
| W 61-48
|
Not exactly a bunch of world-beaters on that list are there. And you can't say beating UW was much of a "quality" win in terms of getting a berth ... they were 14-14 that year. uwgb was having a down year in the midst of their successful run under Dick Bennett ... they finished 13-14. Point out one quality win on that list. You can't ... at least not quality wins the way the committee looks for them. Losing 3 of its last 8 games didn't help UWM, either. I don't mean to take anything away from that team or its players ... it would've been fun to see UWM in the Mid-Con that year against better competition with a much more realistic chance of getting to the NCAAs. Maybe you could say UWM was snubbed for an NIT berth, but that was before the field had expanded to 40. And then, you are brought back to losing 3 of the last 8 games when there was no room for error. No independent in its third year at the Division I level with that kind of resume was getting an at-large berth into the NCAAs ... hyphen or no hyphen. Good point. Relatively speaking, it makes sense. I still do feel that schools which are primarily referred to with a hyphen get dissed a bit more than others (would don't). |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 14, 2009 12:42:46 GMT -6
That doesn't mean I like the hyphen, I don't. I also don't like calling us Milwaukee Panthers. That sounds like a minor-league pro franchise. UWM Panthers works just fine for me. Hey milsport, I'm not trying to knock your opinion or anything, but I do want to see where your coming from. When I was at UWM (and even when I was applying for colleges and had friends at different UW System schools), UWM was known to me and others in my hometown (Beloit), simply as "Milwaukee" (I didn't know the prevalent use of the acronym until I arrived on campus). Similarly, I had friends that went to "La Crosse", "Eau Claire", "Oshkosh", "Stout", "Platteville", and of course, "Madison". So I guess I don't understand why "Milwaukee Panthers" would sound weird when everyone I know knows what school "Milwaukee" is, and knows that UWM and Milwaukee are interchangeable in the same way MU and Marquette are. Again, I'm just wondering why Milwaukee sounds like such a strange reference. We are in fact, the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee". ...You know that I'm overly interested in this naming complex discussion.. I think things will change soon and a name will stabilize- I just hope we get it right.  PS: Keep in mind I have no problem with UWM Panthers- I just think UWM Panthers and Milwaukee Panthers are synonymous- as UW Badgers and Wisconsin Badgers are.. |
|
|
|
Post by Hack on Jan 14, 2009 13:09:34 GMT -6
Can we not have this same ol' argument take up space on every thread? Thanks.
|
|
SRT4driver
Junior
We Are MILWAUKEE! And I'm all about accountability, unlike '5th Placer' Jeter apologists.
|
Post by SRT4driver on Jan 14, 2009 13:56:24 GMT -6
Can we not have this same ol' argument take up space on every thread? Thanks. I agree. It means a lot to many of us, but lets try to keep it to one or two threads. |
|
