The 2009 BCS Baseball Tournament

[William]

A crapfest travesty is when you have 177 rpi teams in the field while rpi numbers 35-60 have to sit and watch.

What is the point of that?

Why do you want to let 1 seeds save their ace for game two?

If you want to see upsets, you will see more my way.

Who cares if northern schools can compete in baseball?

Who cares if southern schools can compete in hockey?

Maybe they should have two tournaments in div 1, one for the best 64 and another where every team gets a trophy and nobody keeps score.

Your argument is defenseless, do you work for the aclu?

here are some of the questions Fever. C'mon give it a shot sport.

[ShockerFever]

A crapfest travesty is when you have 177 rpi teams in the field while rpi numbers 35-60 have to sit and watch.

What is the point of that?

Why do you want to let 1 seeds save their ace for game two?

If you want to see upsets, you will see more my way.

Who cares if northern schools can compete in baseball?

Who cares if southern schools can compete in hockey?

Maybe they should have two tournaments in div 1, one for the best 64 and another where every team gets a trophy and nobody keeps score.

Your argument is defenseless, do you work for the aclu?

here are some of the questions Fever. C'mon give it a shot sport.

Since I've already answered enough of your questions, I'll wait until you answer all of the ones I asked in my post directed towards your brainless tournament theory. Then I'll answer your boppers, pops.

[ShockerFever]

did you mean wandering or wondering, just want to be clear?

Monmoth

Did you mean Monmoth or Monmouth, just want to be clear?

[William]

A crapfest travesty is when you have 177 rpi teams in the field while rpi numbers 35-60 have to sit and watch.

What is the point of that?

Why do you want to let 1 seeds save their ace for game two?

If you want to see upsets, you will see more my way.

Who cares if northern schools can compete in baseball?

Who cares if southern schools can compete in hockey?

Maybe they should have two tournaments in div 1, one for the best 64 and another where every team gets a trophy and nobody keeps score.

Your argument is defenseless, do you work for the aclu?

here are some of the questions Fever. C'mon give it a shot sport.

Since I've already answered enough of your questions, I'll wait until you answer all of the ones I asked in my post directed towards your brainless tournament theory. Then I'll answer your boppers, pops.

Here is how it works, you have to actually ask a question before it can be answered.

[ShockerFever]

Here is how it works, you have to actually ask a question before it can be answered.

Ok. How would you counter every point made in this post?

You want it in a nutshell Willie?

Ok, here ya go:

With your Class F proposed selection process, you would simply get rid of the automatic bids and replace the system to picking the Top 64 teams. The formula for picking your Top 64 is still unknown because you have yet to provide one.

Once your process is implemented, 20 of the 30 conferences in Division I baseball who solely depend on their automatic bids to get into the tournament become non-existent. There is no way all the BCS, good RPI teams out there could or WOULD schedule with any of these 200 or so teams. These 200 teams would not have computer numbers to the liking of the selection committee, making it impossible for any of these 200 teams to make the field. The process would repeat over and over and over again. Before you know it, players begin realizing and wondering what exactly are they playing for in these 20 conferences. They have NO shot at an NCAA Regional. They begin to quit. Before you know it, these 200 or so teams have no one to play for them. Baseball is eliminated from their athletic programs.

Pretty soon, the Top 64 becomes an easier process to achieve because there's only about 100 teams participating in college baseball. This pretty much assures of one huge BCS Tournament. Success, right? Fair? Who cares.

I'm a WSU fan. You say it would benefit WSU. I don't see your rationale. But even if that were the case, I'm not for making things easier for WSU at the expense of others. I want WSU to make the regionals in a fair and balanced way. I don't wanna be like the BCS out there, put on the squeeze, and make it as easy as possible to make the tournament. Because that's what's happening. Maybe in their consciences, they have no problem with it. But I want a fair chance for EVERYONE, not just the big guys.

Thankfully, as for now, the NCAA is about everyone. Maybe not in the at-large process (where there's an obvious skew towards the BCS), but definitely in the automatic formula. That's why it's implemented in every sport the NCAA sponsors (well minus money-hungry football, but that's a story in and of itself) and thankfully, it won't be going away.

Automatic bids are the great equalizer. Throwing them away would eliminate the little guy, namely about 20 conferences in Division I. If you're in favor of contraction, then your system is the way to go. But anybody who is for a fair and balanced playing field, the system will stay the same with automatic bids. Anyone trying to argue otherwise is either a fool or a BCS crapateer... and that is why it's easy to reference you as a Kitty Kat fan Willie.

[William]

Here is how it works, you have to actually ask a question before it can be answered.

Ok. How would you counter every point made in this post?

You want it in a nutshell Willie?

Ok, here ya go:

With your Class F proposed selection process, you would simply get rid of the automatic bids and replace the system to picking the Top 64 teams. The formula for picking your Top 64 is still unknown because you have yet to provide one.

Once your process is implemented, 20 of the 30 conferences in Division I baseball who solely depend on their automatic bids to get into the tournament become non-existent. There is no way all the BCS, good RPI teams out there could or WOULD schedule with any of these 200 or so teams. These 200 teams would not have computer numbers to the liking of the selection committee, making it impossible for any of these 200 teams to make the field. The process would repeat over and over and over again. Before you know it, players begin realizing and wondering what exactly are they playing for in these 20 conferences. They have NO shot at an NCAA Regional. They begin to quit. Before you know it, these 200 or so teams have no one to play for them. Baseball is eliminated from their athletic programs.

Pretty soon, the Top 64 becomes an easier process to achieve because there's only about 100 teams participating in college baseball. This pretty much assures of one huge BCS Tournament. Success, right? Fair? Who cares.

I'm a WSU fan. You say it would benefit WSU. I don't see your rationale. But even if that were the case, I'm not for making things easier for WSU at the expense of others. I want WSU to make the regionals in a fair and balanced way. I don't wanna be like the BCS out there, put on the squeeze, and make it as easy as possible to make the tournament. Because that's what's happening. Maybe in their consciences, they have no problem with it. But I want a fair chance for EVERYONE, not just the big guys.

Thankfully, as for now, the NCAA is about everyone. Maybe not in the at-large process (where there's an obvious skew towards the BCS), but definitely in the automatic formula. That's why it's implemented in every sport the NCAA sponsors (well minus money-hungry football, but that's a story in and of itself) and thankfully, it won't be going away.

Automatic bids are the great equalizer. Throwing them away would eliminate the little guy, namely about 20 conferences in Division I. If you're in favor of contraction, then your system is the way to go. But anybody who is for a fair and balanced playing field, the system will stay the same with automatic bids. Anyone trying to argue otherwise is either a fool or a BCS crapateer... and that is why it's easy to reference you as a Kitty Kat fan Willie.

I've said this 100 times, and I will say it again, the rpi has flaws and needs obama to reform it.

The majority of these teams you are worried about have never been to a regional and yet still seem to field teams, baseball players and I'm sure you never played at this level, compete for conference championships and pride. Guys that go to Monmouth know they aren't going to graduate with any national titles under their belt believe it or not. The fact that they are not going to have a shot at being in the top 64 does not diminish their love for the game.

The reason that 100+ rpi teams hurt WSU is that their invitations to the tournament keep bubble teams like msu at home. WSU is fortunately not a consistent 100+ rpi team but if they had an rpi of 40 this year and failed to win the conf. tourney I know for a fact that you would be freaking out and arguing for the same thing I am today.

Now lets talk a little bit about the little guy and underdogs. Its all a matter of perspective, regardless of the name on the front of the jersey every tournament format has a bottom seed and that team for that year is your little guy your underdog.

[shockfan89_]

The RPI has flaws in football and basketball. It is almost USELESS in baseball. I have no problem with it being ONE factor used but to me finishing in the bottom HALF of your league should cancel any advantage you are willing to give a team based on their RPI.

I actually think the Warren Nolan.com Nitty Gritty report is a fairly compresenhive look at things. I would say you should use the RPI and SOS on non-conference only and then it would probably pretty fairly represent things. Overall I think the selection committee is lazy and just worried about their conference representation.

[ShockerFever]

I've said this 100 times, and I will say it again, the rpi has flaws and needs obama to reform it.

Ok. I am now fascinated on the formula you're going to implement for selecting your Top 64 tourney.

The majority of these teams you are worried about have never been to a regional and yet still seem to field teams, baseball players and I'm sure you never played at this level, compete for conference championships and pride. Guys that go to Monmouth know they aren't going to graduate with any national titles under their belt believe it or not. The fact that they are not going to have a shot at being in the top 64 does not diminish their love for the game.

When your tournament scenario is implemented, I want you to personally go to Monmouth, Marist, Stetson, etc. and tell every player on everyone of those teams and the 200 others that they will no longer be competing for NCAA Regional berths.

The reason that 100+ rpi teams hurt WSU is that their invitations to the tournament keep bubble teams like msu at home. WSU is fortunately not a consistent 100+ rpi team but if they had an rpi of 40 this year and failed to win the conf. tourney I know for a fact that you would be freaking out and arguing for the same thing I am today.

No, MSU keeps MSU at home. If they wouldn't have flunked out against South Dakota, North Dakota State, Middle Tennessee State, Northern Iowa, Illinois State, Creighton in the tourney, etc., they could have been there.

WSU has actually been in that situation many times, and thankfully thanks to being name-brand, and having a good profile, they've been accepted. Hell yes I would be freaking out if WSU was in that position. But who would I be mad at? Not a committee. I'd be mad at WSU for putting themselves in that situation. Simply canning the conference tournaments would not solve those issues. If your formula was in place and WSU had a 60 RPI, we would be in the same exact place.

Now lets talk a little bit about the little guy and underdogs. Its all a matter of perspective, regardless of the name on the front of the jersey every tournament format has a bottom seed and that team for that year is your little guy your underdog.

Perspective? No. In basketball, there is a distinct difference in a No.12 seed being Arizona and a No.12 seed being Northern Iowa. They may have both had identical seasons, profile wise, but one is more of an underdog or "cinderella" than the other. A tournament field consisting of Auburn, Kentucky, Texas Tech, Duke, Virginia Tech as 4 seeds is ENTIRELY different than a tournament field consisting of Marist, Wright State, Fresno State, and WICHITA STATE as 4 seeds. If you can't even see that, then you're more blind than I have ever imagined.

[ShockerFever]

The RPI has flaws in football and basketball. It is almost USELESS in baseball. I have no problem with it being ONE factor used but to me finishing in the bottom HALF of your league should cancel any advantage you are willing to give a team based on their RPI.

I actually think the Warren Nolan.com Nitty Gritty report is a fairly compresenhive look at things. I would say you should use the RPI and SOS on non-conference only and then it would probably pretty fairly represent things. Overall I think the selection committee is lazy and just worried about their conference representation.

AGREED. On all accounts. :good:

[William]

I've said this 100 times, and I will say it again, the rpi has flaws and needs obama to reform it.

Ok. I am now fascinated on the formula you're going to implement for selecting your Top 64 tourney.

The majority of these teams you are worried about have never been to a regional and yet still seem to field teams, baseball players and I'm sure you never played at this level, compete for conference championships and pride. Guys that go to Monmouth know they aren't going to graduate with any national titles under their belt believe it or not. The fact that they are not going to have a shot at being in the top 64 does not diminish their love for the game.

When your tournament scenario is implemented, I want you to personally go to Monmouth, Marist, Stetson, etc. and tell every player on everyone of those teams and the 200 others that they will no longer be competing for NCAA Regional berths.

The reason that 100+ rpi teams hurt WSU is that their invitations to the tournament keep bubble teams like msu at home. WSU is fortunately not a consistent 100+ rpi team but if they had an rpi of 40 this year and failed to win the conf. tourney I know for a fact that you would be freaking out and arguing for the same thing I am today.

No, MSU keeps MSU at home. If they wouldn't have flunked out against South Dakota, North Dakota State, Middle Tennessee State, Northern Iowa, Illinois State, Creighton in the tourney, etc., they could have been there.

WSU has actually been in that situation many times, and thankfully thanks to being name-brand, and having a good profile, they've been accepted. Hell yes I would be freaking out if WSU was in that position. But who would I be mad at? Not a committee. I'd be mad at WSU for putting themselves in that situation. Simply canning the conference tournaments would not solve those issues. If your formula was in place and WSU had a 60 RPI, we would be in the same exact place.

Now lets talk a little bit about the little guy and underdogs. Its all a matter of perspective, regardless of the name on the front of the jersey every tournament format has a bottom seed and that team for that year is your little guy your underdog.

Perspective? No. In basketball, there is a distinct difference in a No.12 seed being Arizona and a No.12 seed being Northern Iowa. They may have both had identical seasons, profile wise, but one is more of an underdog or "cinderella" than the other. A tournament field consisting of Auburn, Kentucky, Texas Tech, Duke, Virginia Tech as 4 seeds is ENTIRELY different than a tournament field consisting of Marist, Wright State, Fresno State, and WICHITA STATE as 4 seeds. If you can't even see that, then you're more blind than I have ever imagined.

Ok, we're all done now, we've both argued our points and.........I WIN
goodnight now!

[ShockerFever]

We we're done a while ago. I'd say you and billybud get the L and the other 10 or so posters who have countered you and your points get the W.

Nighters.

[Ashockalypse]

William did not win because he is a loser but it cannot be said enough times. This committee did a crappy job and they basically cheated to get teams like okie state and baylor in. That's it.

[billybud]

Well guys...I'll be off here for a bit...the games start across town today and I have tickets..

Baseball is such a bargain...football costs an arm and a leg for good bowl seats..yet I can watch every game in a regional with my wife beside me for $95.00.

Good luck guys....


Pinnacle has betting lines for the majority of the games. An interesting note, Baylor and Oklahoma St. were the field's biggest surprises, but both are actually favorites in their opening game.

For the nonsportsbettors, -116 means you'd have to bet $116 to win $100 (profit) meaning you are a favorite and +106 means you could bet $100 to win $106 (profit), you are a dog.



Fri 5/29 203 Oklahoma State -116
12:00 PM 204 Alabama +106

Fri 5/29 207 George Mason +190
12:00 PM 208 South Carolina -210

Fri 5/29 209 Bethune Cookman +391
03:30 PM 210 Florida -431

Fri 5/29 211 Jacksonville +190
10:00 AM 212 Miami Florida -210

Fri 5/29 215 Ohio State +150
09:00 AM 216 Georgia -160

Fri 5/29 219 Southern Miss +115
12:00 PM 220 Elon -125

Fri 5/29 221 Indiana +293
04:00 PM 222 Louisville -323

Fri 5/29 223 Vanderbilt -136
12:00 PM 224 Middle Tennessee State +126

Fri 5/29 227 Kansas -113
11:00 AM 228 Coastal Carolina +103

Fri 5/29 231 Baylor -119
04:00 PM 232 Minnesota +109

Fri 5/29 235 Western Kentucky +126
01:00 PM 236 Missouri -136

Fri 5/29 237 Wichita State +274
05:00 PM 238 Oklahoma -294

Fri 5/29 239 Washington State +124
11:00 AM 240 Arkansas -134

Fri 5/29 243 Xavier +236
12:00 PM 244 Kansas State -256

Fri 5/29 247 Boston College -106
11:00 AM 248 Texas State -104

Fri 5/29 249 Wright State +270
05:00 PM 250 TCU -300

Fri 5/29 251 Oregon State +109
12:00 PM 252 Texas A&M -119

Fri 5/29 255 Cal Poly -134
02:00 PM 256 Oral Roberts +124

Fri 5/29 259 Gonzaga +106
03:00 PM 260 Georgia Southern -116

Fri 5/29 261 Fresno State +284
08:00 PM 262 UC Irvine -314

Fri 5/29 263 San Diego State -213
04:00 PM 264 Virginia +193

[ABC]

Hey...Don't get your pants in a BCS non BCS wad.

WSU did have some success at the CWS. I never said different. WSU is an unusual example outside of California, because the school has had a nationally respected baseball team.

The thing for the Shockers is to continue that success so that the run from 1991-1993 (now 16 seasons past) is more than an aging memory.

You can't treat that three year run like an aging spinster going through her scrapbook remembering her salad days while fondling her pressed, dessicated, and faded high school prom corsage.

Relevancy is what we all want for our teams....

I am impressed by Texas..who won in 1949 and is still winning in 2005. Texas went 30 years without playing in the final. Sometimes you have a run of good years, and sometimes you have to wait.

Texas has always been a great baseball school..but they had to keep the faith a long time.

WSU's CWS run was 1988 - 1996 with six appearances and three national title games and one win. (and a national title game in 1982)

They've had success since then and had at least two teams worthy of the CWS, but that's why the have the NCAA tournament. And as you recall, WSU was only one win away from the CWS last year, and just a few runs away in 2007.

Recently hosting a super regional makes WSU still relevant. Now if we continue for a few years with performance of this year, then that is a differnet discussion.

Having 27 NCAA tourney appearances in a little over 30 years is fairly consistent, me thinks.

And throw in our high attendance, fairly good draft picks and folks making the majors and WSU is still a nationally relevant program.

[CharlieHog]

And throw in our high attendance, fairly good draft picks and folks making the majors and WSU is still a nationally relevant program.

Which is why I'm always surprised to see your own fans classing your program in with mid-major programs.