2010 Bubble Watch

[ISASO]

Why didn't Weiser just tell us the truth? Roy Williams called in a marker from a fellow conference-mate who was heading up the selection committee. Wasn't that easier than a wordy, contrived answer?

[ShockerFever]

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/college/baseball/usatpoll.htm

From the latest ESPN poll, can anyone name the 4 teams that didn't make the NCAA Tournament?

Also, can anyone name the only Top 30 ranked team to not make the tournament?

[vbird53]

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/colle...l/usatpoll.htm

From the latest ESPN poll, can anyone name the 4 teams that didn't make the NCAA Tournament?

Also, can anyone name the only Top 30 ranked team to not make the tournament?

Well, that's kind of a smack in the face.

[billybud]

Can anybody name the ten teams with a lower RPI than the Shockers who also didn't get an at large bid?

If the RPI had been 10-15 points lower, a 40-45 rather than 56, I think that WSU would have gone.

[vbird53]

Alright, I know there are a few reasons the selection committee would have for not giving WSU a spot in the tourney this year, but even after a couple of days to take it all in, I'm still pretty mad about the whole thing.

After all the equity the WSU program has built over the last 30 years, being left out after finishing the way we did, scheduling our traditional west coast swing and other midwest schools, facing a starting pitchers injury (and return), and then making the championship game of our conference just really sucks.

Can anyone imagine a possible scenario where a basketball program like Arizona's is left out of the NCAA tourney after a year like ours?

Like it or not (BCS), Wichita State is still a premier baseball program in the midwest. We showed all the other "northern" schools that a team can compete, and build a national program, and sustain it long-term.

I think it's fairly obvious what has to happen from this point forward: DO NOT GIVE THE SELECTION COMMITTEE THE OPTION OF LEAVING US OUT. This goes for basketball, too.

[WuDrWu]

The RPI is flawed, especially in baseball, big time. It is a tool to protect and further pad the resumes of the whores to the NCAA of which your school is one of the 2 bit founders. That ain't garnett billyboy, that's Dollar Store Lip Smackin' Cherry Red clumsily smeared all over your face to match your streetwalker 5 inch ankle breaking stilettos.


That being said, your school isn't without redeeming qualities.

[shox1989]

Can anybody name the ten teams with a lower RPI than the Shockers who also didn't get an at large bid?

If the RPI had been 10-15 points lower, a 40-45 rather than 56, I think that WSU would have gone.

New Mexico got in with a #52 rpi (warren nolan) so I guess if our rpi had been 52 instead of 56 we would probably be in.

In other words if we had won one more home game (add one more win and take away the loss) we would probably be in: MOST or SJS pick one.

[vbird53]

Can anybody name the ten teams with a lower RPI than the Shockers who also didn't get an at large bid?

If the RPI had been 10-15 points lower, a 40-45 rather than 56, I think that WSU would have gone.

Don't come in here with those three little letters. I'd like for you to name just one instance in which the RPI has helped a non-BCS school into the postseason, because I could name dozens of examples of how it certainly helped keep one out.

[WuDrWu]

Can anybody name the ten teams with a lower RPI than the Shockers who also didn't get an at large bid?

If the RPI had been 10-15 points lower, a 40-45 rather than 56, I think that WSU would have gone.

Don't come in here with those three little letters. I'd like for you to name just one instance in which the RPI has helped a non-BCS school into the postseason, because I could name dozens of examples of how it certainly helped keep one out.

Or, more egregiously, ignored so as to give credibility to another "bcs" school. Does anyone think there is a chance in Hades that say, a Maryland is going to be left out with a 25 RPI? Never happen in a million years, but it sure as shootin' is a possibility if you are a Missouri State or Utah State.

[billybud]

I do not really know the alchemy behind committee decisions....

I think that RPI is used as a selection tool.

Especially to justify a decision. What the NCAA is very good at is using multiple standards to review and select and then pulling out the one that defends their decision.

Dr WU...LOL...been a while since I have been to a smack board. The kiddie boards are boring. But I do like your FSU cowgirl. Stilletto heels? These gals wear Tony Luchese, I'll bet.

My wife is a Texan, she sniffs at upmarket boots and wears off the rack boots like Tony's.

[billybud]

But...I'll say this...

IF WSU had an RPI of 21 (ala NC) and wasn't selected, I bet we would hear those three letters in here. A lot.

[Shocker85]

I do not really know the alchemy behind committee decisions....

I think that RPI is used as a selection tool.

Especially to justify a decision. What the NCAA is very good at is using multiple standards to review and select and then pulling out the one that defends their decision.

'zactly. Any of several "in" or "out" teams can be justified depending upon which criteria are being discussed.

The Shox got "in" and hosted a couple years ago and everyone outside Shocker Nation was saying W-T-F? Committee says, never in doubt. Go figure.

I still don't think by any standard WSU deserved a bid this season. The non-con blow-ups were clear signs of a team not ready for prime time.

Win more, complain less.

--'85.

[WuDrWu]

I'm not here to try and validate the possible inclusion of WSU this season.

My point, and I think a point that most fans around here have, is that the selection process is gynormously flawed when a school that's proven time and time again that while they may be competitive, they can't even make their own conferences tournament, is told by the NCAA "we know you can't win against the best, but we're going to give you yet another chance" while a team that had little (or no) opportunity to prove themselves against the best but hammers the others is told "yeah, you're good but you haven't proven yourself enough to warrant a 1st chance".

1 teams gets a second chance (or a third, fourth or even fifth) and another never gets a chance, simply on the basis of who they have played.

It's skewed, and in the wrong way.

[billybud]

Yeah...but that team was competitive enough to go the CWS for the last 4 straight years...

When your conference has 7 of the tournament players in the regionals, four as #1 seeds, and two as #2 seeds, maybe being the 9th team in that conference isn't that bad.

It is difficult to have an objective measurement given the different existing circumstances across college baseball and basketball.

We as fans are as bad as the NCAA, we pick out that which justifies our team.

But you must, in my opinion, give value to wins. Wins over bad teams are not worth as much as wins over good teams. The definition of "goodness" of win is where we all disagree since RPI is one of the few objective measures developed. And folks can argue its objectivity.

In the south, Boise is the poster child for the arguments about the measurement of "wins". Boise is touted as the "winningest" football team of the decade (2000-2009), and they are.

Boise won a astounding 94% of their games against their opponents in this span who were from non-BCS conferences....but only 37.5% of games against BCS conference teams.

The Gators say..."Hmmm...but in that same period we won 100% of our games against non BCS teams and 73% against BCS teams".

"We are playing off of the pro tees while they are teeing up on the ladies tees."

There are multiple sides to the measurement of the quality of a season...and thus we are guaranteed message board fodder for the rest of our days.

[vbird53]

Yeah...but that team was competitive enough to go the CWS for the last 4 straight years...

When your conference has 7 of the tournament players in the regionals, four as #1 seeds, and two as #2 seeds, maybe being the 9th team in that conference isn't that bad.

It is difficult to have an objective measurement given the different existing circumstances across college baseball and basketball.

We as fans are as bad as the NCAA, we pick out that which justifies our team.

But you must, in my opinion, give value to wins. Wins over bad teams are not worth as much as wins over good teams. The definition of "goodness" of win is where we all disagree since RPI is one of the few objective measures developed. And folks can argue its objectivity.

In the south, Boise is the poster child for the arguments about the measurement of "wins". Boise is touted as the "winningest" football team of the decade (2000-2009), and they are.

Boise won a astounding 94% of their games against their opponents in this span who were from non-BCS conferences....but only 37.5% of games against BCS conference teams.

The Gators say..."Hmmm...but in that same period we won 100% of our games against non BCS teams and 73% against BCS teams".

"We are playing off of the pro tees while they are teeing up on the ladies tees."

There are multiple sides to the measurement of the quality of a season...and thus we are guaranteed message board fodder for the rest of our days.

My response to that is: play the game. Florida vs. Boise St.

Oh wait. Florida would never want to agree to a home and home.