And again JeffHamilton82 gets CRUSHED

quote:

---

The premise is wrong to begin with. The correct question is not "What is the best way to win a NC?" but "What is the best way to get to the CWS?"

---

Disagree. The trophy isn't handed out to everyone who gets to the CWS, it is handed out to the team who wins the CWS. Why would you focus your studies on the 7 losers and not the winner?

quote:

---

And again JeffHamilton82 gets CRUSHED

---

Coming from a sip I will take that as a compliment.

quote:

---

quote:

---

And again JeffHamilton82 gets CRUSHED

---

Coming from a sip I will take that as a compliment.

---

Good grief

quote:

---

quote:

---

The premise is wrong to begin with. The correct question is not "What is the best way to win a NC?" but "What is the best way to get to the CWS?"

---

Disagree. The trophy isn't handed out to everyone who gets to the CWS, it is handed out to the team who wins the CWS. Why would you focus your studies on the 7 losers and not the winner?

---

I think people say that because the trends of what happens once you're to Omaha are less clear. A lot of people are acknowledging a national seed isn't guaranteed to win, but it seems a very good way- perhaps the best way- to get yourself into the pool of 8 teams of which the national champion will be crowned based on who played the best that particular week.

At any rate, of the 17 national champions:

7 were National Seeds

6 were 1-Seed, non-national seeds

1 2-seed

2 3-seeds

1 4-seed

quote:

---

At any rate, of the 17 national champions:

7 were National Seeds

6 were 1-Seed, non-national seeds

1 2-seed

2 3-seeds

1 4-seed

---

Those are true, but there seems to be another trend that has taken place and we have seen it the last 10 years and really reinforced in the last 4 years. And that trend is away from national seeds winning the title. Who can say why? Maybe the committee is doing a worse job of seeding? Maybe it can be blamed on bad umpiring, bad weather, or the baseball gods? Maybe NS players get cocky and then get upset by a hungry team? I don't know why the trend is away from NS winners. But disrespecting a streak just because you don't like it is not smart baseball.

Again, the real point is being missed which is titles aren't won in May, so don't give up on your team based upon how they are playing in May. Stay positive, be supportive and remember than you are a FANatical. We had a lot of people griping here in May and we were a 50 win team. Take that negative energy elsewhere. This is Texags, we are suppose to be the most fanatical of all fans. The best, damn it!

TexAgs must pay Hamilton to troll.

quote:

---

quote:

---

And again JeffHamilton82 gets CRUSHED

---

Coming from a sip I will take that as a compliment.

---

You know you are wrong when all the Aggies are on the same side of a teasip, assuming that Hamilton is correct on that. And considering Hamilton's track record, why would I assume that?

quote:

---

quote:

---

The premise is wrong to begin with. The correct question is not "What is the best way to win a NC?" but "What is the best way to get to the CWS?"

---

Disagree. The trophy isn't handed out to everyone who gets to the CWS, it is handed out to the team who wins the CWS. Why would you focus your studies on the 7 losers and not the winner?

---

For the reason given that once in the CWS anything can happen.

Now that his goal post arranged point has been proven invalid, he's trying to move the goal posts of the point of the thread.

I think it is smarter to look at what actually happened instead of going with your assumption of anything can happen. In my world actual results trump your beliefs and assumptions.

quote:

---

I think it is smarter to look at what actually happened instead of going with your assumption of anything can happen. In my world actual results trump your beliefs and assumptions.

---

Who knows what color the sky is in your world, Jeff.

This article has some interesting information. One thing they don't tell you is how many of the non-national seed winners play a NS in the SR.


In total, since 1999, 42 percent (54 of 128) teams to participate in the College World Series were not a national seed. Of those 54 teams, 41 percent have at least reached the semi finals with almost 20 percent of those teams going to the finals. The past also shows that when a non-national seed makes it that far in the world series, they have a good chance of winning, as 50 percent of series winners did not earn a national seed. Two of them Texas (2005) and Oregon State (2007) went undefeated throughout the series.Even if not winning the whole tournament, non-national seeded teams have shown they can compete against the powerhouses of the country. In CWS play, non-national seeds are 98-97 (.503) since 1999 and only 28 percent (15 of 54) of teams that made it went home without a win or what is referred to as "two and que".History shows us that Florida State is also at an advantage of hosting a regional. Of the last 16 winners, 14 of them have hosted a regional to begin postseason play. Of the eight non-national seed winners since 1999, five of them were a #1 seed in their regional. Recent history gives the Noles even more of an optimistic outlook as since 2012, non-national seeded teams outnumbered the national seeded participants in the CWS 15-9

http://www.tomahawknation.com/2015/5/28/8676109/florida-state-seminoles-baseball-ncaa-college-world-series-regionals

quote:

---

quote:

---

I think it is smarter to look at what actually happened instead of going with your assumption of anything can happen. In my world actual results trump your beliefs and assumptions.

---

Who knows what color the sky is in your world, Jeff.

---

Not about the sky in my world. The facts are readily available on the internet. Google NCAA baseball champions.

quote:

---

quote:

---

The premise is wrong to begin with. The correct question is not "What is the best way to win a NC?" but "What is the best way to get to the CWS?"

---

Disagree. The trophy isn't handed out to everyone who gets to the CWS, it is handed out to the team who wins the CWS. Why would you focus your studies on the 7 losers and not the winner?

---

Because anything can happen once you get there, but you have to get there to have a chance to win. Don't be so dense.

quote:

---

quote:

---

The premise is wrong to begin with. The correct question is not "What is the best way to win a NC?" but "What is the best way to get to the CWS?"

---

Disagree. The trophy isn't handed out to everyone who gets to the CWS, it is handed out to the team who wins the CWS. Why would you focus your studies on the 7 losers and not the winner?

---

Because once you get to the CWS, your advantage of having been a national seed is over. Or rather, the advantage of hosting, because being a national seed doesn't necessarily mean you host supers. Hosting at your own house on your own field in front of people who are cheering for you is an advantage. Once you get to Omaha, that advantage is gone, and you're playing a bunch of very good teams on neutral ground. National seed means next to nothing then.

quote:

---

TexAgs must pay Hamilton to troll.

---

That ... and he's kind of a dbag

Obviously you didn't watch the CWS. UVA got tons of BS calls that propelled them to a win over superior teams. It's absolute BS that they hosted a Superregional against Maryland(!) while the Ags went to Ft Worth. Ags would have beaten UVA 10 times in a row given fair officiating. NCAA wanted a yankee school to win. And yes, UVA is a yankee school. Half their students are rich, preppy NY/NJ kids who couldn't get into real schools based on their merits.

There's one stat that is irrefutable, 100% of all CWS winners made it to the CWS. So I guess the only question to be answered is, what gives a team the best chance to get there?

That's right, most on here have been trying to answer that statistically. Isn't it fun to be "Hamiltonized"? Welcome to the zoo.

It's baseball. Anything can happen. If you lose your first game in regional you can throw the statistics out the window.

The strongest teams prove themselves during the regular season
where the 3 game weekend series is the norm
With the days off in Omaha the format is different
which over the small sample size has led to more upsets than would be expected

Flexibility, creativity, and gut feel all seem to be important for winning the championship. When you're in the loser's bracket, sure, you can throw your #2, but then what? Maybe you gamble, use your Tuesday night guy to get you through, then you've got your Saturday and Sunday guys available. Maybe you throw a guy who's pitched 5 innings all season, but players grow up, and you get a hunch because of his last outing. Maybe you take a guy who's been in the 6 hole all season, and you move him up to 2 because he had some good swings against LH junk-ballers.

I liked what Virginia's coach said - he focused on the hardware, and not just the game ahead of him.

For the most part, I thought Childress did the same thing. He knew for the Ags to win it all, Stubblefield would have to be a big part of it. He knew we couldn't afford to have Nau behind the plate, even if it kept Gideon out of the lineup. He started Kent in the first game of the regional so he could have him available Monday. He trusted Hendrix to be the ace in the pen.

One thing I would have done differently - I never would have left Birk in the 2-hole for the last game against a LHP.

Sure, you play one game at a time, but the good coaches seem to be coaching about 3 games at once.

We had a pretty good team this past year. Not an elite team, however. We peaked too early.

Nice thread necromancy. The selection committee took a swipe at us probably to test Sankey's mettle. It was a shame and we didn't perform well under pressure against some of the best pitching we faced. And that happened repeatedly this year against the better pitchers. Which implies--and others have commented--that pitching-oriented Childress amped up defense over offense against better pitching in a strategic decision to improve the value of runs we actually plated. That put us back in the relatively less aggressive world that we blamed on Sawyers last year. Perhaps it was Childress all along?