dermdoc said:
You are correct. Sorry. They actually had them as the number 11 seed before the Big 12 tourney.
So, you'd play 2 parallel tournaments on the same field? Have you ever been to one of these? Did you watch any of the SEC tournament? Rain would be a nightmare.Postal said:
Like I said, this is measurable, and maybe only having 8 sites instead of 16 would fix that pesky $ problem.
twk said:So, you'd play 2 parallel tournaments on the same field? Have you ever been to one of these? Did you watch any of the SEC tournament? Rain would be a nightmare.Postal said:
Like I said, this is measurable, and maybe only having 8 sites instead of 16 would fix that pesky $ problem.
I'll go back to the basketball parallel. It works just fine for them, and that tournament makes the NCAA more money than anything else.twk said:What's the point of going to a "nearby minor league park." If you did neutral site regionals, you'd have them scattered across the country politically, rather than based upon where the 1 seeds were likely to be located. They would solicit bids to host (used to do this back in the day), but would end up giving regionals to minor leauge parks in California, the upper Midwest, and Northeast, that bid $75kPostal said:
Too little fan interest? This is measurable. I guess we can take a look at all 16 host site attendance figures after next weekend, and then see if a nearby minor league park could hold the same.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't baseball have a lot more parity than softball? Kind of an apples to oranges comparison.TXMatt15 said:
I don't think it's a ridiculous claim to say A&M should have hosted
Softball awarded Kentucky a regional with an 8-15 SEC record (they had a 13 RPI), you shouldn't penalize teams for being in a tougher conference, strength of schedule should matter.
Auburn also probably deserved it more than tu for the above reasons
MLB won't let their teams host conference tournaments because of the wear and tear on the field (didn't like what happened at Arlington when the Big XII played there). No way they go for your type of set up.Postal said:I'll go back to the basketball parallel. It works just fine for them, and that tournament makes the NCAA more money than anything else.twk said:What's the point of going to a "nearby minor league park." If you did neutral site regionals, you'd have them scattered across the country politically, rather than based upon where the 1 seeds were likely to be located. They would solicit bids to host (used to do this back in the day), but would end up giving regionals to minor leauge parks in California, the upper Midwest, and Northeast, that bid $75kPostal said:
Too little fan interest? This is measurable. I guess we can take a look at all 16 host site attendance figures after next weekend, and then see if a nearby minor league park could hold the same.
Let's use this year as an example, and let's go big because we're Texans! Minute Maid puts in a bid to host an opening weekend, and it's one of only 8 host sites that host 8 teams. So you'd have two brackets going on at the same time. First thing's first, weather is taken out of the equation. Second, let's start naming the teams that would be in the Houston Regional--- A&M, Texas, Baylor, Houston, Sam, LSU, Dallas Baptist, Kentucky. It would be nuts, but there would be plenty of room, parking, etc. I don't know how the money works, but the Aggies played at the Charlotte NBA stadium this year in the basketball tournament, and again the NCAA makes money. It might not always work our regionally like I've stated, but then again, neither does the basketball tourny.
Again, this is measurable, and when we know the entire field tomorrow, I can update this and other sites with a realistic 8 site bracket.
Dude, they did it at Hoover, AL didn't they? After the play in game, there were 8 teams remaining. They battled weather, but they got it all in. Also, this would be playoffs, and if they had to finish on Monday or Tuesday then it's not a big deal, they do it now anyway.twk said:So, you'd play 2 parallel tournaments on the same field? Have you ever been to one of these? Did you watch any of the SEC tournament? Rain would be a nightmare.Postal said:
Like I said, this is measurable, and maybe only having 8 sites instead of 16 would fix that pesky $ problem.
Why do you think having eight sites is going to mean t.u. is not going to host when it is not deserved? Before the the expansion from 48 to 64, there were eight six team tournaments and more often than not during the era of college ball there was a regional in Austin. Most of the time the sips deserved to host, but not always.Postal said:
Okay, then pick 8 and have 8 teams at each site. It's what they do for the SEC tournament. School is out, people will still come to the games. Again the NCAA basketball tournament (mens and womens) spills over into the weekdays, and people still attend.
TXMatt15 said:
I don't think it's a ridiculous claim to say A&M should have hosted
Softball awarded Kentucky a regional with an 8-15 SEC record (they had a 13 RPI), you shouldn't penalize teams for being in a tougher conference, strength of schedule should matter.
Auburn also probably deserved it more than tu for the above reasons
A LOT more parity. Top 16 seeds advanced to the Supers, Top 8 all advanced to WCWS.Shane Minks said:Correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't baseball have a lot more parity than softball? Kind of an apples to oranges comparison.TXMatt15 said:
I don't think it's a ridiculous claim to say A&M should have hosted
Softball awarded Kentucky a regional with an 8-15 SEC record (they had a 13 RPI), you shouldn't penalize teams for being in a tougher conference, strength of schedule should matter.
Auburn also probably deserved it more than tu for the above reasons
Shane Minks said:Correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't baseball have a lot more parity than softball? Kind of an apples to oranges comparison.TXMatt15 said:
I don't think it's a ridiculous claim to say A&M should have hosted
Softball awarded Kentucky a regional with an 8-15 SEC record (they had a 13 RPI), you shouldn't penalize teams for being in a tougher conference, strength of schedule should matter.
Auburn also probably deserved it more than tu for the above reasons
Hoover's "8 team" tournament (removing the first day single elimination games) is a planned 5 day tourney. FIVE. Without rain delays. They begin playing at 9:30am. Little/no room to squeeze in a rained out game. Do you really think we should be playing actual post season games at 9:30? The current regionals are 3 days. Games begin in the afternoon, one night game, you have extra space in the morning to make up and weather delayed games if necessary.Postal said:Dude, they did it at Hoover, AL didn't they? After the play in game, there were 8 teams remaining. They battled weather, but they got it all in. Also, this would be playoffs, and if they had to finish on Monday or Tuesday then it's not a big deal, they do it now anyway.twk said:So, you'd play 2 parallel tournaments on the same field? Have you ever been to one of these? Did you watch any of the SEC tournament? Rain would be a nightmare.Postal said:
Like I said, this is measurable, and maybe only having 8 sites instead of 16 would fix that pesky $ problem.
There is a reason that MLB no longer allows tournaments on its field during the season. It is not because they don't want to help popularize the college game, it is because such tournaments are tough on fields.Postal said:
They're going to play baseball not football. All that standing around by 3 dudes in the outfield is not going to completely tear it up. Also, the most that would happen would be 14 games in 4 days. The Minute Maid Classic plays 9 games in 3 days. It is played at the beginning of March, and the regular season MLB doesn't start until the end of March. Also, this year the Astros have a 11 day road stand (I'm just using them as an example) from 7-18 June. If you added one more series and make it a full 14 days away, then there would be plenty of time to rehab the field.
Also, your example was from 20 years ago. Baseball is in an upswing, and I believe there will be more and more of the next generation playing and watching baseball.
dermdoc said:
D1 already leaked it last week when they had them as the #12 seed. I predict they are 13-14.
First, I'm sure I've said it before in your threads, but thanks for taking care of conference and regional scores on this forum. This forum is my fist and only stop to get caught up with that.jkag89 said:Why do you think having eight sites is going to mean t.u. is not going to host when it is not deserved? Before the the expansion from 48 to 64, there were eight six team tournaments and more often than not during the era of college ball there was a regional in Austin. Most of the time the sips deserved to host, but not always.Postal said:
Okay, then pick 8 and have 8 teams at each site. It's what they do for the SEC tournament. School is out, people will still come to the games. Again the NCAA basketball tournament (mens and womens) spills over into the weekdays, and people still attend.
Baseball is not boundyball. Just because a certain model works well for basketball does not mean it will work for baseball. The regional bid systems works for baseball,, it is the second most profitable NCAA championship behind the men's basketball tournament which makes the lion share of its profit through TV rights not ticket sales.
As for why Omaha should get to host the CWS every year. First, the city does a tremendous job of hosting year in and year out. The cities residents often adopt the teams as their own especially those that make regular appearances. Second, the city made a big commitment to the event building a brand new ballpark to host the event. The event is synonymous with Omaha now. There are not chants of CWS when a team achieves a berth but chants of Omaha.
What you are proposing isn't a "tweak" You're simply ranting because t.u. got an undeserving bid.Quote:
Just because it's not broken, doesn't mean it can't be tweaked
Postal said:
As for Omaha, it's also a minor league park that hosts 2 parallel brackets, and then plays a best of 3 on the end of that. But Omaha is not better than any other city. Any other city that hosted would also do a tremendous job. It's sweet that there are some folks in Omaha who like the SC Gamecocks, but I don't give a damn, and neither does even the most avid college baseball fan.
You shut your mouth! Basketball is NOT a sport!jkag89 said:What you are proposing isn't a "tweak" You're simply ranting because t.u. got an undeserving bid.Quote:
Just because it's not broken, doesn't mean it can't be tweaked
Also the worst thing to propose to baseball fans is a model based upon another sport., nothing will make us dig our heels in more.
Because you are. But pairing them with WooPig is brutal. Also, Arkie as a 5 seed is too low IMO.TXMatt15 said:
D1 Baseball has the Longhorns as a 12 seed (updated tonight) paired with the Arkansas regional
You can make a legitimate argument for the Longhorns as a top 16 seed and I think that's reasonable but I just don't see how you could say they are deserving to be as high as 12. That seems like you are rewarding them based off their name, not performance.
No, I just wanted to talk about how we could possibly get away from this business at the end of the year where schools are randomly awarded host sites. I've obviously upset the apple cart. I'm not trying to troll anyone. I'm being sincere.dermdoc said:
Were you that smooth talking coke head on Die Hard?
Edited to add to stay away from Hans.
Sean98 said:You shut your mouth! Basketball is NOT a sport!jkag89 said:What you are proposing isn't a "tweak" You're simply ranting because t.u. got an undeserving bid.Quote:
Just because it's not broken, doesn't mean it can't be tweaked
Also the worst thing to propose to baseball fans is a model based upon another sport., nothing will make us dig our heels in more.
Well, I get it. Baseball is a tradition heavy sport. You probably followed the Aggies before 1989. I bet though in 1989 if someone blew bubbles when the Aggies scored, then you would have thought that was sac religious then.jkag89 said:What you are proposing isn't a "tweak" You're simply ranting because t.u. got an undeserving bid.Quote:
Just because it's not broken, doesn't mean it can't be tweaked
Also the worst thing to propose to baseball fans is a model based upon another sport., nothing will make us dig our heels in more.
dermdoc said:
Agree but I would rather go to Lubbock as I do not think Tech is any better than tu. And the super pairing would be better.
Oh, you're saying it? Well, then, that changes everything.Bunk Moreland said:etcetera said:
Iirc, the selection commitee does count all games between conf members as conference games when compiling a team's conference record. It can be a conf tournament game or even a Wednesday game.
Here's a post from Gabe Bock of texags staff:Quote:
...keep in mind that the committee counts any game played during the year against a conference opponent as a league game. So while the random "out-of-conference" midweek game between Ole Miss and Mississippi State doesn't count in the league standings, it's still a conference game as far as tournament selection goes. The same goes for the SEC Tournament games. So in order to really help itself with the committee, Texas A&M needs to make a nice little run in Hoover.
https://texags.com/s/28383/diamond-notes-examining-postseason-hopes-as-am-heads-to-hoover
That may be what they say but all I'm telling you is human nature doesn't change and they still view regular season conference record in a bucket.
If a different team in the big 12 won more games in the tourney that 0-2 tu and overtook them in total wins, they weren't going to just magically say the other team won the conference.
Imo that's the committee providing lip service to cover themselves when they make a major swing up on a team that goes on a conference tourney run.
