PacifistAg said:

---

Mikeyshooter said:

---

PacifistAg said:

---

Quote:

---

Simply making the post-season should be our norm not cause for celebration.

Hosting a Regional should happen 80-90% of the time and a Super every two to three years.

---

What programs, over the last 14 seasons, have reached those standards?

---

Just guessing here: TCU, Oregon State, Texas Tech, LSU, Mississippi State, Florida, Vanderbilt, Arkansas, UNC, and Louisville. I'm sure I'm missing a handful but there's no reason why A&M can't be in this group.

---

Well, I believe only FSU and Vandy have reached the postseason as much as A&M in that stretch.

Regional hosts:
TCU (7)
Oregon St
Texas Tech (3)
LSU (8)
MSU (2)
Florida (9)
Vandy (6)
Arkansas (5)
UNC
Louisville (4)
A&M (6)

Super Regionals:
TCU (7)
Oregon St
Texas Tech (3)
LSU (7)
MSU (6)
Florida (8)
Vandy (6)
Arkansas (5)
UNC
Louisville (6)
A&M (6)

This was from a review of the respective wikipedia pages. Couldn't find the information for Oregon St or UNC. So, I'm not sure why there are calls to fire RC when we have been "in this group".

---

And Fullerton. Fullerton is not going to make the tournament this season. No school has met the standard set by Mikeyshooter. Oregon St. with all it success in winning National Titles is nowhere close to meeting the standard having the stretch between its back to back titles (one of the last to make the field on the backend of that also) and their recent run of success in which they were infrequently in the field. TCU needs to win the BDF tournament or they will miss the NCAAs for the second year in a row and the third time since joining the BDF. On the other hand,, the four other seasons they made it to Omaha. Arkansas for all their postseason success under Van Horn has often started the journey away from the Baum. North Carolina had back to back seasons not too long ago where the did not even make the tournament, much less host. The reason the SEC tournament is ungainly as it is not solely due expansion but for the fact that LSU did not make the conference tournament a couple of times under Mainieri but would have likely done so based on RPI. In other words, even the teams that are considered the elite of the elite do not have the kind of success many casual fans believe.

The point I was trying to make was that we should not settle for status quo. If you don't try you'll never get any better. I'm not satisfied or ok with what we are accomplishing now. I want more.

Mr.Ackar07 said:

---

Northern Colorado has that many appearances because, way back then, the committee chose schools to represent each district of the country in the CWS. That is also why Yale has had a few appearances when George Bush attended.

---

Ah, interesting. I learned something new today.

PacifistAg said:

---

drthoop said:

---

The point I was trying to make was that we should not settle for status quo. If you don't try you'll never get any better. I'm not satisfied or ok with what we are accomplishing now. I want more.

---

I don't think you'll find a single person in the program, or a single Aggie, who doesn't want more. Not wanting to fire RC doesn't mean we don't want more. I think most agree changes need to be made, specifically with regards to who oversees hitting.

---

I never once said to fire Rob. My point is that the status quo is unacceptable. Whatever it takes to change that is what I want.

So...

Luck.

PacifistAg said:

---

drthoop said:

---

The point I was trying to make was that we should not settle for status quo. If you don't try you'll never get any better. I'm not satisfied or ok with what we are accomplishing now. I want more.

---

I don't think you'll find a single person in the program, or a single Aggie, who doesn't want more. Not wanting to fire RC doesn't mean we don't want more. I think most agree changes need to be made, specifically with regards to who oversees hitting.

---

He shouldn't have autonomy on that. He'll just bring in another subordinate buddy and the results will be the same.

Quote:

---

No school has met the standard set by Mikeyshooter.

---

Please don't credit me for whatever ridiculous standard was described previously. I just want to be an elite college baseball program. Right now we aren't close.

Where is my morning baseball? After three straight 9:30 am games, doesn't that qualify as a tradition?

I guess what I'm really saying is, "I have nothing to distract me. I guess I have to work."

SchizoAg said:

---

All of the people who want to fire Childress because "we can do better" are taking it for granted that the next coach would be better and not worse. That's the part I'm very skeptical about. It seems far more likely that we'd end up with another Mark Johnson. Great guy; similar CWS performance to Rob; far more "down" years. I'm not even sure there is any coach who would have *guaranteed* success here. Certainly not Corbin or Schlossnagle, for example. Corbin enjoys his cushy recruiting situation, and Schloss has proven himself mortal.

---

The next coach could very well be worse - see Fran in football.

But that's not the point - the point is that when you stagnate, and in my opinion our program has done exactly that under the current staff - you have 2 choices:

1. Accept your lot in life under that program and leave things as they are to stagnate, which always ends up in a slow decline as recruits opt to go to programs that aren't in neutral

2. Roll the dice, use the best information available and take your chances with a new staff. If it works, it works. If it doesn't, you move on again.

It's not like RC hasn't had opportunity - he has. He's had a really good career here. But after 15+ years, if you can't be objective and look at what he's done and realize that - for whatever reason - he's not going to be the guy to suddenly get us to Omaha and win at Omaha, I'm at a loss as to what it will take before that realization sets in.

Many here argue against a change simply because we've made the post season for 11 or 12 or whatever straight years. A good metric, to be sure - but making the post season means you are simply one of the top 64 teams in the country. The top 64 is 21% of the programs in the country - that's not the same as making the final 4 in basketball or anything remotely close.

I sincerely hope that RC proves me wrong with this season and next season - I really do. I'll eat crow all day long, because I honestly don't care who the coach is here - I care about results and I want A&M to be something other than a team that makes regionals regularly and visits other stadiums to play in supers and, generally, watches Omaha from the couch. I'll take a season on occasion where we don't make regionals if the trade-off is winning in Omaha and competing for a championship when we do make the post season.

Aggies2009 said:

---

Wicked Good Ag said:

---

Mikeyshooter said:

---

PacifistAg said:

---

Quote:

---

Simply making the post-season should be our norm not cause for celebration.

Hosting a Regional should happen 80-90% of the time and a Super every two to three years.

---

What programs, over the last 14 seasons, have reached those standards?

---

Just guessing here: TCU, Oregon State, Texas Tech, LSU, Mississippi State, Florida, Vanderbilt, Arkansas, UNC, and Louisville. I'm sure I'm missing a handful but there's no reason why A&M can't be in this group.

---

Two of those teams might not make the tourney this year. And TCU also didn't make it last year at all. If you are talking 14 years no way Tech is in that discussion either.
honestly I think only LSU and Miss State Vandy Florida and Oregon State fit the bill of what you are looking at and four of those are in the same conference as us
Texas Tech coming into that category and Louisville in the brink

---

Goes back to my question from earlier....

If given the options, would people rather have a coach that consistently gets us into the post season with a semi-deep run every few years? Or would you rather have a coach who may miss the postseason every few years, but wins a game or two in Omaha?

---

The bolded part. Every day and twice on Sunday - except hopefully shooting for more than just winning a game or two in Omaha.

I felt the same way this morning

schmellba99 said:

---

SchizoAg said:

---

All of the people who want to fire Childress because "we can do better" are taking it for granted that the next coach would be better and not worse. That's the part I'm very skeptical about. It seems far more likely that we'd end up with another Mark Johnson. Great guy; similar CWS performance to Rob; far more "down" years. I'm not even sure there is any coach who would have *guaranteed* success here. Certainly not Corbin or Schlossnagle, for example. Corbin enjoys his cushy recruiting situation, and Schloss has proven himself mortal.

---

The next coach could very well be worse - see Fran in football.

But that's not the point - the point is that when you stagnate, and in my opinion our program has done exactly that under the current staff - you have 2 choices:

1. Accept your lot in life under that program and leave things as they are to stagnate, which always ends up in a slow decline as recruits opt to go to programs that aren't in neutral

2. Roll the dice, use the best information available and take your chances with a new staff. If it works, it works. If it doesn't, you move on again.

It's not like RC hasn't had opportunity - he has. He's had a really good career here. But after 15+ years, if you can't be objective and look at what he's done and realize that - for whatever reason - he's not going to be the guy to suddenly get us to Omaha and win at Omaha, I'm at a loss as to what it will take before that realization sets in.

Many here argue against a change simply because we've made the post season for 11 or 12 or whatever straight years. A good metric, to be sure - but making the post season means you are simply one of the top 64 teams in the country. The top 64 is 21% of the programs in the country - that's not the same as making the final 4 in basketball or anything remotely close.

I sincerely hope that RC proves me wrong with this season and next season - I really do. I'll eat crow all day long, because I honestly don't care who the coach is here - I care about results and I want A&M to be something other than a team that makes regionals regularly and visits other stadiums to play in supers and, generally, watches Omaha from the couch. I'll take a season on occasion where we don't make regionals if the trade-off is winning in Omaha and competing for a championship when we do make the post season.

---

Not disagreeing with your sentiment but I would also argue making the tourney puts you in the top 30-35 programs after the automatic bids which puts you in the top 10% roughly. Also I would argue when you make a super regional you are tied for ninth. And I would also argue that even if beaten at the regional or super regional level you could still be a top 5 team see 1989.

I think his point, or at least mine, is that we can say the coach isn't adequate and that's fine. But to claim we have some gold mine of resources that we would be elite if we just tapped is ignorant and lazy. We are matched or outclassed in the resources department by at least five schools either in our state/region or conference.

TCU didn't go to four straight CWS because it has "baseball resources." It just hired a great coach. Same with Tech's recent run, along with them getting low-seed help in literally each of their runs.

So let's go get an elite coach, if we can -- Rob doesn't seem to be one. The entitlement just seems categorically misguided to me.

LSU's average attendance is typically double Texas A&M's. LSU's average attendance is above listed capacity.

They played Grambling on a Tuesday night and had a listed attendance of 9,804.


Even on a hypothetical night when a high rate of LSU ticket holders don't show up, they still have a crowd size that rivals or bests the biggest crowds at most stadiums. The Box is the most electric atmosphere in college baseball.

TXAggie2011 said:

---

LSU's average attendance is typically double Texas A&M's. LSU's average attendance is above listed capacity.

They played Grambling on a Tuesday night and had a listed attendance of 9,804.


Even on a hypothetical night when a high rate of LSU ticket holders don't show up, they still have a crowd size that rivals or bests the biggest crowds at most stadiums. The Box is the most electric atmosphere in college baseball.

---

And full of loud obnoxious drunks!

So there were 8 days between Dox's "almost" no hitter and his next start in the regionals? Good thing ole Rob saved him from those few extra pitches in the 9th.....no hitters are a dime a dozen in the SEC, they'll be another.

Aggies2009 said:

---

Dgrimesag92 said:

---

So there were 8 days between Dox's "almost" no hitter and his next start in the regionals? Good thing ole Rob saved him from those few extra pitches in the 9th.....no hitters are a dime a dozen in the SEC, they'll be another.

---

Holy **** do you know ANYTHING? I guess I expect too much from someone who didn't know Boomer White was only here for a year.

1) Risk of injury increases the further a pitcher goes. His rest afterward is irrelevant when we're talking an injury happening or not. Fatigue isn't what people were worried about.

2) You're assuming he'd have not allowed a hit in the 9th. And since we didn't score in the bottom of 9, he'd have had to come out and pitch again in the 10th. How far did you want him to go? Had we been winning 3-0, maybe it would have been a different story.

3) He was losing control in the 8th (walked 2 of his 4 batters in the 8th and threw 12 of his 37 balls on the day in the 8th).

4) The top of the Ole Miss lineup was coming up and would be seeing him for the 4th time.

5) You act like regionals aren't important... We've heard time and time again how bad the 2016 season was in spite of the team winning the SEC tournament because they didn't go to Omaha. Why should he sell out in the SEC tournament 3 years later?

6) How do you know Dox didn't request to be removed?

---

Da fuq are you talking about pampers? Boomer? The one year transfer from TCU, who was also ruined by the Bolt and Childress show?

1) assuming

2) assuming

3) assuming

4) assuming

5) assuming

6) assuming

On Texags? That's kind of unusual, innit?

From the article by Richard Zane.....says nothing about fear of injury. Just that he was to be back on the mound in 8 days. It's also apparent in the article, Dox Wanted to go back out.

""Doxakis did more than we needed him to do, asked him to do, just like he has all year long," A&M head coach Rob Childress said. "He's going to be on mound for us in eight days as well, and that's where the decision was made."

John Doxakis departed the ballgame having not allowed a hit through eight innings and struck out 10 Rebels. The only runners Ole Miss managed off him were via four walks.

"You never want to give up the ball in a game like that," Doxakis said."

chester said:

---

TXAggie2011 said:

---

LSU's average attendance is typically double Texas A&M's. LSU's average attendance is above listed capacity.

They played Grambling on a Tuesday night and had a listed attendance of 9,804.


Even on a hypothetical night when a high rate of LSU ticket holders don't show up, they still have a crowd size that rivals or bests the biggest crowds at most stadiums. The Box is the most electric atmosphere in college baseball.

---

And full of loud obnoxious drunks!

---

Yeah, ok? Should it be more like a church service?

TXAggie2011 said:

---

LSU's average attendance is typically double Texas A&M's. LSU's average attendance is above listed capacity.

They played Grambling on a Tuesday night and had a listed attendance of 9,804.


Even on a hypothetical night when a high rate of LSU ticket holders don't show up, they still have a crowd size that rivals or bests the biggest crowds at most stadiums. The Box is the most electric atmosphere in college baseball.

---

Man if attendance == performance on the field we should be in the football playoff almost every year.