credit to Stanford

they buckled down, regrouped, and played better in their final 3 games

unlike some regional hosts that just rolled over and died after losing the 1-0 game

Clemson, Miami, Arkansas, etc..,

OP, that wasn't about being aggressive, it was about knowing your personnel. That dude was fast, very fast and that's why you take that risk. Plus we were slow getting the ball in. Wasn't about aggressive play, it was about better play when it counted.

Cleanup hitter -3 for 16 last 4 games - 8 strikeouts! Pathetic!

BigJim49 AustinNowDallas said:

---

Cleanup hitter -3 for 16 last 4 games - 8 strikeouts! Pathetic!

---

Pretty sure you don't know who our cleanup hitter is

AggieCrew44 said:

---

BigJim49 AustinNowDallas said:

---

Cleanup hitter -3 for 16 last 4 games - 8 strikeouts! Pathetic!

---

Pretty sure you don't know who our cleanup hitter is

---

Jace was 4 of 16 with 8 K's in our last 4 games actually.

AggieCrew44 said:

---

He said 3 hits hence my comment

He's probably the last guy on the offense I'd get mad. 3 hits yesterday and a 3 run bomb in the Sunday game

---

This . The team was worn out from playing high stress baseball for 3 weeks straight …. On the road . It wears a team down …. Especially one that sends out the same lineup , game after game. Depth really hurt us .

I wonder if playing so many games in Hoover hurt us in the long run?

Stanford is the number 8 team in the country for a reason. Hold your head high! Great season! See you next season!

It doesn't matter how good they are. We had beaten them once already. Had them at a severe disadvantage going into Sunday with them needing to win twice.

If this was a battle, we had hilltop position and the sun at our back. Stanford was running uphill while looking into the sun, and still managed to overrun our position.

Numerous veterans came up in key spots and failed to produce. Pop up, pop up, strike out.

We had a 80ish% chance to advance based off of being 2-0. Don't care how great the other team is. After already beating them, beating them again in 1 of 2 games should happen with a team of our caliber.

Oral Roberts, TCU, and Duke got it done. Why can't we?

Sickening knowing how close we were to advancing and failing to do so.

Neither ORU, Duke nor TCU advanced last season while the Aggies advanced all the way to Omaha.

Indiana, tech and Penn also did not advance after going up 2-0 in their respective Regionals so we were hardly the only team that failed to advance when 2-0.

What does those teams not advancing last year mean for this year? With us advancing last year, we should know what it takes/want to get back there just as much or more than the others.


Indiana, Penn, and tech aren't very good so not surprised. We are better than all of those teams, and even beat tech this year.

Edit: we brought back almost the whole team from last year. Shouldn't that be a great advantage in advancing?

the issue goes back to the regular season.

the Ags played an Omaha team in the regional round this year

last year...A&M did not play any teams of Stanford's quality in the regional round. Had an easier draw. And got to play a 4-seed during the regional.

it's important to host

Goodness we still have people think we should've sent the runner home on that play? You can knock our aggressiveness or lack thereof, but to use that play as an example is asinine. It wouldn't have taken a perfect throw. He could've bowled the ball home underhand and he would've been out.

CrocsAg20 said:

---

What does those teams not advancing last year mean for this year? With us advancing last year, we should know what it takes/want to get back there just as much or more than the others.

---

You do realize that even the the elite of the elite do not advance out Regionals or even make Regional play every year, don't you? Do you consider Florida an elite program? Do you consider their coach, O'Sullivan, an elite coach? Would it surprise you this is the first time since winning it all in 2017 that the Gators have advanced as far as the Supers. It shouldn't because it is a fact.

Of the eight teams that were in Omaha last year only Stanford and t.u are still playing. How come the experience and know how of last season did not carry them further?

Quote:

---

Indiana, Penn, and tech aren't very good so not surprised.

---

All three of these teams were good enough to make the field. All three of them were good enough to start 2-0.

Quote:

---

We are better than all of those teams, and even beat tech this year.

---

So tech isn't a very good team because we squeaked out a 16 inning game against them in early March? Um, OK?

Quote:

---

Edit: we brought back almost the whole team from last year. Shouldn't that be a great advantage in advancing?

---

Key contributors to last season's Omaha team that did not return: Dylan Rock, Troy Claunch, Kole Kaler, Moo Menefee, Jacob Palisch, Micha Dallas and I'm probably forgetting one or two more.

Out of that whole post, you focused on the sickening comment? It is an idiom...

But yes, I am. Are you not? We were right there on the cusp. There were multiple threads about us playing the sips and who would host, insinuating a bunch of people were expecting a win. To be so close and in the catbird position, then to lose it all, is sickening (the idiom).

Is disappointing a better word then? A lot of words work right there, but I digress. Use whatever word you want; it is ______ to be in that position and not advance.

Congrats on all that stuff. I am looking forward to experiencing a lot of those things one day myself, God willing.

aginlakeway said:

---

I wonder if playing so many games in Hoover hurt us in the long run?

---

This is an interesting point. It does seem that many times going deep in the conference tournament turns into a negative during the regionals/supers.

Hats off to Stanford. They were just better. I did find this narrative before the series that the PAC-12 doesn't have nearly as good of pitching as what we were accustomed to seeing a bit curious. The pitching is elite on the West coast. It is the reason all these teams have a tendency toward small ball.

CrocsAg20 said:

---

Is disappointing a better word then? A lot of words work right there, but I digress. Use whatever word you want; it is ______ to be in that position and not advance.

Congrats on all that stuff. I am looking forward to experiencing a lot of those things one day myself, God willing.

---

It's disappointing.

aggiebrad94 said:

---

Not bunting Kaufer was the turning point IMHO

---

I like the attitude of less sac bunts, but that one was a classic sac bunt situation. Putting that one up there with the Aggie Punt in the 1999 Sugar Bowl down by 2 scores.

waco_aggie05 said:

---

aginlakeway said:

---

Southlake said:

---

Send the runner around 3rd. Make them make a perfect throw.

But, they were a better team.

I'll enjoy watching Quinn shut down the sips.

---

Really?

You mean the perfect throw back at 3rd base after they got him in a rundown? He was barely at 3rd base when the CF threw the ball.

---

We all knew he was going to be stranded when he wasn't sent. Why not put pressure on them to make an error?

I think you have to chalk up a few runs to home field advantage as well. Trevor losing a ball in 'bay fog', Sdao slipping. They came out confident and loose and we were tense and conservative.

---

We all knew the next batter wasn't going to drive him in?

The chances were actually much higher of him driving him in than of the runner scoring on the hit. Much higher. The runner was barely at 3rd.

I wasn't there and the replay doesn't show where the runner is at any point past 2nd base in the broadcast...

Hard to tell where the windup begins because of the broadcast, but watching the replay....

From the windup (1:34:58 in the broadcast)
Haas rounding 2nd (1:35:02)
The ball is collected by the CF (1:35:05)
He has about 3 seconds to collect the ball rolling slowly off the grass, to throw home from centerfield.

College baseball is more interesting because there are more errors and close plays. The throw has to be accurate, the catcher has to field it cleanly, and he has to apply the tag.

There would have likely been a play at the plate, but in a situation where you need a spark momentum can make all the difference, especially against a superior team (as many of your pointed out). Maybe he is safe, maybe he is out, but he is not stranded at 3rd.

Knoxville_Ag_08 said:

---

I wasn't there and the replay doesn't show where the runner is at any point past 2nd base in the broadcast...

Hard to tell where the windup begins because of the broadcast, but watching the replay....

From the windup (1:34:58 in the broadcast)
Haas rounding 2nd (1:35:02)
The ball is collected by the CF (1:35:05)
He has about 3 seconds to collect the ball rolling slowly off the grass, to throw home from centerfield.

College baseball is more interesting because there are more errors and close plays. The throw has to be accurate, the catcher has to field it cleanly, and he has to apply the tag.

There would have likely been a play at the plate, but in a situation where you need a spark momentum can make all the difference, especially against a superior team (as many of your pointed out). Maybe he is safe, maybe he is out, but he is not stranded at 3rd.

---

IMO ... the chances were higher of him being driven home (or scoring in another way) than in scoring on the hit.

We lost 2 out of 3 to one of the best teams in the country. They won because they had better and deeper pitching and more talented players at the plate that came through.

It's disappointing.

We had to play much better than we did to get another win, but Stanford had something to do with that. Again they are a good to very good team (time will tell).

What Schloss has done in 2 years has been solid in putting together a competitive team and getting us to Regionals and to the CWS. Recruiting baseball players as I understand is years in the works and so we are a bit behind the 8 ball with some players.

The portal is a different animal. I believe Schloss will have success there as well but I know NIL $ would help. I'm not sure how much of that we are getting right now or if its enough to make a difference.

Bottom line is that Schloss is a helluva coach and has us headed in the right direction despite the disappointment.

HoustonAg2106 said:

---

Scoring from first on a single not hit in the gap is pretty rare, even if he was on the move. He likely gets thrown out there and then most of you are complaining about sending him too.

---

100% agree. He wasn't on the move. It wasn't in the gap. The CF came in a few steps to field it. Totally different story if it got between the outfielders.

It was far more likely statistically that he finds a way to score from 3rd vs. him scoring on that hit.

Werner was right around .250 all year. Add in the small chance of a WP, PB, error, etc. ... so call it 30% that he scores from 3rd with 2 outs and Werner at the plate.

5% that he scores on the hit.

To me a big spot was Haas' second at bat in the first inning of the Sunday game. First pitch was clearly outside and called a strike. Kinda got him to where he was chasing pitches with 2 strikes. While he had a nice foul ball, he had several swings on balls low and away with the final out coming on a tapper to the pitcher on a pitch that was low and away.

dermdoc said:

---

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

---

Better than us for 2 out of 3 … back to back wins was the exclamation point. Stanford was better enough. Let's hope they're good enough to shut tu down this weekend. Almost always like seeing our victor keep on winning.

You gotta play better than .500 ball … .500 in the regional and .500 in conference play including the extra games in making it to the SEC Final.

It was sad for Nathan Detmer who pitched probably his best of the season … only with no run support and off again relief pitching.

aginlakeway said:

---

CrocsAg20 said:

---

It doesn't matter how good they are. We had beaten them once already. Had them at a severe disadvantage going into Sunday with them needing to win twice.

If this was a battle, we had hilltop position and the sun at our back. Stanford was running uphill while looking into the sun, and still managed to overrun our position.

Numerous veterans came up in key spots and failed to produce. Pop up, pop up, strike out.

We had a 80ish% chance to advance based off of being 2-0. Don't care how great the other team is. After already beating them, beating them again in 1 of 2 games should happen with a team of our caliber.

Oral Roberts, TCU, and Duke got it done. Why can't we?

Sickening knowing how close we were to advancing and failing to do so.

---

You're really sickened by this? Really. Wow.

---

It could have been really bad for this guy had we advanced and got throttled by t.u. for some reason.

aginlakeway said:

---

Knoxville_Ag_08 said:

---

I wasn't there and the replay doesn't show where the runner is at any point past 2nd base in the broadcast...

Hard to tell where the windup begins because of the broadcast, but watching the replay....

From the windup (1:34:58 in the broadcast)
Haas rounding 2nd (1:35:02)
The ball is collected by the CF (1:35:05)
He has about 3 seconds to collect the ball rolling slowly off the grass, to throw home from centerfield.

College baseball is more interesting because there are more errors and close plays. The throw has to be accurate, the catcher has to field it cleanly, and he has to apply the tag.

There would have likely been a play at the plate, but in a situation where you need a spark momentum can make all the difference, especially against a superior team (as many of your pointed out). Maybe he is safe, maybe he is out, but he is not stranded at 3rd.

---

IMO ... the chances were higher of him being driven home (or scoring in another way) than in scoring on the hit.

---

You would think with the guys coming up to hit at that point could have made contact enough to get him him, but unfortunately that didn't happen.