Top of the 5th - 2 outs - full count - Moss hits a grounder to right with Haas 1st and taking off on the pitch. Conservatively held at 3… K for Werner inning over

Bottom of the 5th - Campbell triples to deep right on what should have been a double and scores.

Holding Haas is the antithesis of sending Campbell. Campbell's triple ignited his team - gave them confidence and swagger.

Aggressive plays pay off more than just a base - it changes mentalities, gives momentum and confidence. In a 1-1 game it makes (made) all the difference.

Stanford won because they were better than us. They have much more talent.

Not bunting Kaufer was the turning point IMHO

Stanford is a really good team. I don't have an issue with losing to them.

But for them to play an early game, have very limited pitching, and then run us 20-6 in the final two games.....disappointing. This was for a Super against the sips. Where was the emotion? the dawg? The heart?

Knoxville_Ag_08 said:

---

Top of the 5th - 2 outs - full count - Moss hits a grounder to right with Haas 1st and taking off on the pitch. Conservatively held at 3… K for Werner inning over

---

Our runner was barely to third by the time the right fielder threw it in.

Would have been out by a country mile.

We lost by 8 runs Sunday and by 6 runs yesterday. These were due to our mindset? Really? They look more like ass-kickings to me.

HoustonAggie37713 said:

---

Stanford is a really good team. I don't have an issue with losing to them.

But for them to play an early game, have very limited pitching, and then run us 20-6 in the final two games.....disappointing. This was for a Super against the sips. Where was the emotion? the dawg? The heart?

---

Ags were playing with house money, no doubt. In my opinion, the last two against the Cardinal boiled down to Stanford scratching out clutch hits while the Ags couldn't. There were opportunities there last night that the team just couldn't capitalize on.

aggiebrad94 said:

---

Not bunting Kaufer was the turning point IMHO

---

Critical point in the game IMO. Plus the fact that they brought in a guy that just threw 114 pitches on Friday. What do we do? Swing at the very first pitch for a GIDP. Max can be faulted for that, but then again the young kid really did well in the SEC tourney and the Regional. Can't wait to see how he progresses next year.

HoustonAggie37713 said:

---

Stanford is a really good team. I don't have an issue with losing to them.

But for them to play an early game, have very limited pitching, and then run us 20-6 in the final two games.....disappointing. This was for a Super against the sips. Where was the emotion? the dawg? The heart?

---

Where was the talent is a fair question. But there is zero doubt we saw the coaching up in a season where we had a more difficult campaign especially the pitching.

Dirty came through with an admirable closing effort in a year when SEC umpires forced him to change his game because his sinker is a key pitch and fooling both batters and umps with it was how he got strikes.

While I like the idea that emotion should have carried the team, you have to recognize what the real shortcomings were. And as Derm said: they were better and won a series with us within the regional head to head 2 of 3.

FTAG 2000 said:

---

Knoxville_Ag_08 said:

---

Top of the 5th - 2 outs - full count - Moss hits a grounder to right with Haas 1st and taking off on the pitch. Conservatively held at 3… K for Werner inning over

---

Our runner was barely to third by the time the right fielder threw it in.

Would have been out by a country mile.

---

Yep. Our runner would have likely been caught in a rundown actually.

I also understand that Schloss doesn't like to bunt, but when you have a nine hole hitter, batting 175 and can't run, for the love of God learn to lay down a bunt

dermdoc said:

---

Stanford won because they were better than us. They have much more talent.

---

Yep. It's that simple.

I don't care who their coach talked to about running that pitcher out there again after a Friday outing with 114 pitches. Having him throw again for an extended period is coaching malpractice imo.

OP must have missed the season where we routinely had double steals, stole 3rd base, hit and run, scored multiple runs from 1s base on a hit, etc. Not being aggressive enough is absolutely NOT a problem with a Schloss team. We have even scored runs from 2nd on a base hit to LF that many other teams would hold the runner at 3rd.

Stanford was better. Most have them in the CWS and many in the CWS Finals.

We are not a CWS team this season, and not a Top 16 team in the country either, but we are a Top 25 team and really good and capable of beating anyone when we played our best baseball.

You throw the ball
You hit the ball
You catch the ball


When 2 of the three aren't very good, you usually lose.

dermdoc said:

---

Stanford won because they were better than us. They have much more talent.

---

This.....and the umpteen pop ups.....and unclutch hitting. If not for Haas in the first Stanford game, there probably wouldn't have been a game 7.

Seen a lot of ball and can't remember a triple down the right field line that was cut off and never made it to the corner or wall. That's inexcusable.

Finished the season strong and ready to see the Ags in Omaha again.

AgOutsideAustin said:

---

Seen a lot of ball and can't remember a triple down the right field line that was cut off and never made it to the corner or wall. That's inexcusable.

Finished the season strong and ready to see the Ags in Omaha again.

---

With Minnich out, no arms at all in outfield.

For a team that was so aggressive on the base paths during the year, it's puzzling that there was very little aggression during the regional

The team looked tired to me. I think the 9 games in 11 days took its toll. The SEC tournament is too long and perhaps it should be changed to all single elimination.

The throw got to their infielder a second after Haas got to third. It would have been an aggressive send to the point of recklessness and would also assume you're trying to win a one run game (because you're more than likely ending a 3 run possibility for 1 unlikely run making that decision).

Couple that with our most aggressive swings in counts where we were ahead leading to pop-ups and the fact that they scored enough runs with home runs to outscore us even with all "non-aggressive" decisions accounted for, and I don't think it's because we were playing scared.

I actually agree that we should have bunted Kaufer. Eliminate the double play and move some people into scoring position. But Kaufer had 0 sacrifice hits on the year, so it's possible Coach knew better than to ask based on his own information. The team had 2 SH all year, and if we're being honest, most people applauded the staff for that decision.

I thought the lineup and the pitching decisions were about right given the personnel. And despite a good start from Dettmer (which was above the mean for this season), they hit and pitched better than we did. Sometimes you play a team that played better than you did and has good players people on it. I'm not sure why everything gets Disney Channeled and refined down to "we didn't want it the most" or "we weren't aggressive" or "we weren't mentally prepared". As if no one on the team thought to make the big speech in the locker room or think to pay attention in the biggest game of their baseball careers to this point.

MSFC Aggie said:

---

dermdoc said:

---

Stanford won because they were better than us. They have much more talent.

---

This.....and the umpteen pop ups.....and unclutch hitting. If not for Haas in the first Stanford game, there probably wouldn't have been a game 7.

---

What's crazy is if Haas's foul ball HR went fair we are up 8-2, we throw our better arms, and likely sweep the regional. Baseball is an amazing but cruel sport