BiancoBury gonna BiancoBury

[Coach34]

not sure why anybody thought this time was different

[RTO Dawg]

not sure why anybody thought this time was different




Ellis not getting the win = another year the bears miss OMAHA

[Maroonthirteen]

Much like Coach Red Beaulieu, Bianco can't do squat with Bobby Boucher. But yeah, I don't think it would have mattered for the result tonight but he pulled Ellis to quick. That guy hit a well located pitch out. Regardless, he went further into his pitching staff than he needed tonight.

Doesn't matter though. ULL is on a mission.

[Dawg61]

Doesn't matter though. ULL is on a mission.

And that mission is to lose to Texas in the NCS

[smootness]

Much like Coach Red Beaulieu, Bianco can't do squat with Bobby Boucher. But yeah, I don't think it would have mattered for the result tonight but he pulled Ellis to quick. That guy hit a well located pitch out. Regardless, he went further into his pitching staff than he needed tonight.

Doesn't matter though. ULL is on a mission.

Eh, he had walked 3, hit one, and gave up a HR in 2.1. I think he made the right move.

[yjnkdawg]

And that mission is to lose to Texas in the NCS

I think ULL's current mission is to beat Ole Miss, and then look to Texas, who I hope ULL beats. JMO

[ckDOG]

Like the sun rising in the east, OM begins its post season choke job. He really is Biancobury. Well, minus the program crushing final 2 years of the Bury...

[Todd4State]

They're in a Cajun hornets nest right now.

And I do think that he pulled Ellis at a reasonably good time- he was up to 70+ pitches in the third inning, missing with his command and they were working his counts up. And then he gave up a shot.

[Todd4State]

Like the sun rising in the east, OM begins its post season choke job. He really is Biancobury. Well, minus the program crushing final 2 years of the Bury...

To be fair, we don't know when Bianco's final two years will be.

[engie]

5 Sweet 16s though**

[shannondawg]

Nice try. Coach!

[MadDawg]

Doh!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

You are sooooo right, Coach. No coach ever gets better or can raise their ceiling, especially if they have been at their current job very long. Nailed it, again.

[smootness]

Doh!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

You are sooooo right, Coach. No coach ever gets better or can raise their ceiling, especially if they have been at their current job very long. Nailed it, again.

Please tell me you're not trying to bring Stans into this.

[Political Hack]

Please tell me you're not trying to bring Stans into this.

the title of the thread brought Stans into this. Surprised it lasted this long without coming up.

[coastdoglover]

Obsession, PROZAC, please try it, the board will appreciate it!

[MadDawg]

Please tell me you're not trying to bring Stans into this.

Seriously, dude. The ****ing title of the ****ing thread was "BiancoBury gonna BiancoBury" and yet you chastise ME for beinging Stansbury into this? Get a ****ing clue.

[smootness]

Seriously, dude. The ****ing title of the ****ing thread was "BiancoBury gonna BiancoBury" and yet you chastise ME for beinging Stansbury into this? Get a ****ing clue.

My apologies, I seriously didn't even process that. My bad. It's ok, though, you can calm down just a tad.

If you're trying to use this to say that we shouldn't have let Stans go because he could have ultimately broken through, though, we'll just have to disagree.

[MadDawg]

My apologies, I seriously didn't even process that. My bad. It's ok, though, you can calm down just a tad.

If you're trying to use this to say that we shouldn't have let Stans go because he could have ultimately broken through, though, we'll just have to disagree.

And my apologies for being a dick about it. Reading all this press about the Bears has me on edge this morning. And, no, I have no desire to beat that rotting horse corpse any more.

[Coach34]

It just shows everybody can eventually break thru except Stands

[ckDOG]

Like the sun rising in the east, OM begins its post season choke job. He really is Biancobury. Well, minus the program crushing final 2 years of the Bury...

Foot in mouth. Well done, Bianco. That team is strong.

[maroonmania]

Bianco now > Stansbury I guess.

[Coach34]

Bianco now > Stansbury I guess.

Yep- he broke thru to the big stage

[Homedawg]

Bianco now > Stansbury I guess.

It didn't take until yesterday. He'd been to the final 16 4 times prior to this year! Not a fair comparison. Bianca's record kills stansbury's.

[Coach34]

It didn't take until yesterday. He'd been to the final 16 4 times prior to this year! Not a fair comparison. Bianca's record kills stansbury's.

Well, the Stands Sheep established years ago that making the Sweet 16 in basketball is equal to the CWS- not a Super. It made them feel better I guess

[Homedawg]

Well, the Stands Sheep established years ago that making the Sweet 16 in basketball is equal to the CWS- not a Super. It made them feel better I guess

Oh...... I see. Both tourneys start w 64 teams. Well basketball 68, and they have "equal" resumes. Uh huh. Yea.

[Dawg61]

Well, the Stands Sheep established years ago that making the Sweet 16 in basketball is equal to the CWS- not a Super. It made them feel better I guess

Really don't want to bring this argument back out again but 10 baseball teams in the SEC made it into the 64. We won't see 10 SEC basketball teams make the NCAA tournament in the same year in our lifetimes. It is more difficult to make a sweet 16 as an SEC basketball team than it is as an SEC baseball team. It just is.

[engie]

Well, the Stands Sheep established years ago that making the Sweet 16 in basketball is equal to the CWS- not a Super. It made them feel better I guess

That approach has been mostly abandoned since I basically disproved it statistically a couple of years back...

[Homedawg]

Really don't want to bring this argument back out again but 10 baseball teams in the SEC made it into the 64. We won't see 10 SEC basketball teams make the NCAA tournament in the same year in our lifetimes. It is more difficult to make a sweet 16 as an SEC basketball team than it is as an SEC baseball team. It just is.
So our league sucks. Therefore it should be easier to win games and make the tourney every year like bianco does in baseball....... Didn't happen.

[MadDawg]

Really don't want to bring this argument back out again but 10 baseball teams in the SEC made it into the 64. We won't see 10 SEC basketball teams make the NCAA tournament in the same year in our lifetimes. It is more difficult to make a sweet 16 as an SEC basketball team than it is as an SEC baseball team. It just is.

Not even mentioning how warm weather teams (south, east and west coast) have traditionally dominated college baseball and post season. It isn't as dramatic today as it was 10 years ago though.

[engie]

Really don't want to bring this argument back out again but 10 baseball teams in the SEC made it into the 64. We won't see 10 SEC basketball teams make the NCAA tournament in the same year in our lifetimes. It is more difficult to make a sweet 16 as an SEC basketball team than it is as an SEC baseball team. It just is.

I REALLY hope you don't do anything dealing with logic or numbers in the real world.

[engie]

Not even mentioning how warm weather teams (south, east and west coast) have traditionally dominated college baseball and post season. It isn't as dramatic today as it was 10 years ago though.

And Power 6 teams(plus about 4 midmajors) have traditionally dominated college basketball and the postseason. Running the numbers, there is a remarkable similarity between the numbers of "haves" that advance every single year in each of the two sports. I've run through it in detail before.

The problem a bunch of our fans have is in their inability to look beyond the circumstance of "MSU". Is it easier FOR MSU to make the final 16 in baseball? At this point, sure it is. Because we've built a national power in that sport over about 40 years in every regard. Something we haven't done in basketball. If you ask Duke or Kentucky which is easier, you'll get a different answer.

[Coach34]

Really don't want to bring this argument back out again but 10 baseball teams in the SEC made it into the 64. We won't see 10 SEC basketball teams make the NCAA tournament in the same year in our lifetimes. It is more difficult to make a sweet 16 as an SEC basketball team than it is as an SEC baseball team. It just is.

The Big East does this in basketball....so what?

[Dawg61]

I REALLY hope you don't do anything dealing with logic or numbers in the real world.

When's the last time the SEC had 10 teams in the NCAA basketball tournament? The argument isn't for a B1G or ACC or Big East basketball team. It's for an SEC basketball team and it is more difficult for an SEC basketball team to make the final 16 than it is for an SEC baseball team because it is more difficult to make the tournament period for the SEC in basketball than in baseball. The SEC is the number 1 baseball conference. 10 of the 14 SEC teams made it this year in baseball. What dumbass logic are you using in your "real world"?

[Dawg61]

The Big East does this in basketball....so what?

The argument isn't about any other conference other than the SEC. It is more difficult to make the tournament in SEC basketball than it is in SEC baseball. Therefore it is more difficult to get to the Sweet 16 for an SEC basketball team than it is for an SEC baseball team.

[smootness]

The argument isn't about any other conference other than the SEC. It is more difficult to make the tournament in SEC basketball than it is in SEC baseball. Therefore it is more difficult to get to the Sweet 16 for an SEC basketball team than it is for an SEC baseball team.

This is just not true, though. The reason the SEC produces more NCAA tournament baseball teams is because there are more good baseball teams in the conference than basketball. I realize this is obvious, but there is nothing inherent about being an SEC basketball team that makes it more difficult to reach the postseason than being an SEC baseball team. It just so happens that the SEC hires better coaches and gets better players in baseball than in basketball.

When evaluating the job performance of any single coach, it still should be evaluated the same way.

If State was as good in basketball as we are in baseball, we would make the postseason more in basketball.

[CadaverDawg]

I'm not in either "camp", but IN MY OPINION it is MUCH easier to make a sweet 16 in baseball. (Keeping in mind that there is no way to prove either is more difficult, only opinions). When the basketball tourney goes to 4 team pods with the equivalent of a 15/16 seed in EVERY pod, and makes it double elimination in multiple rounds, get back to me. You get one shot in basketball. ULL would have been gone 1st game. It's not as hard in baseball bc you can lose 3 games in the tournament and still win the championship.

Just my OPINION though

Not to mention you could play all the way to the Elite 8 on your home field potentially.

[Dawg61]

It makes it more difficult when 10 of the 14 teams have worse than 80 RPIs. The biggest factor the committee uses in determining who gets in is rpi. You're just arguing to argue at this point which is nothing new with you smootness. You'd argue the sky isn't blue and the grass isn't green. It's more difficult to make the NCAA tournament for an SEC basketball team than it is for an SEC baseball team because the league as a whole has shit rpi numbers that pull everyone down.

[Dawg61]

I'm not in either "camp", but IN MY OPINION it is MUCH easier to make a sweet 16 in baseball. (Keeping in mind that there is no way to prove either is more difficult, only opinions). When the basketball tourney goes to 4 team pods with the equivalent of a 15/16 seed in EVERY pod, and makes it double elimination in multiple rounds, get back to me. You get one shot in basketball. ULL would have been gone 1st game. It's not as hard in baseball bc you can lose 3 games in the tournament and still win the championship.

Just my OPINION though

Excellent points. I haven't even begun with the actual tournament being easier (especially if you have dominate SP), I'm just focusing on the fact it is much much easier for an SEC baseball team to make the tournament than an SEC basketball team at the current conference rankings.

[engie]

I'm not in either "camp", but IN MY OPINION it is MUCH easier to make a sweet 16 in baseball. (Keeping in mind that there is no way to prove either is more difficult, only opinions). When the basketball tourney goes to 4 team pods with the equivalent of a 15/16 seed in EVERY pod, and makes it double elimination in multiple rounds, get back to me. You get one shot in basketball. ULL would have been gone 1st game. It's not as hard in baseball bc you can lose 3 games in the tournament and still win the championship.

Just my OPINION though

Not to mention you could play all the way to the Elite 8 on your home field potentially.

How does being double elimination make anything "easier"? You've simply got to win 2 basketball games in 3 days to get there. That's it. There's alot more "15/16 seeds" in baseball that have an ace that can beat you on any given day too...

It's not an opinion thing -- it's math. There is a 16/302 chance of getting it done in baseball -- and a 16/349 chance in basketball. A difference of 0.7% in difficulty.

[engie]

It makes it more difficult when 10 of the 14 teams have worse than 80 RPIs. The biggest factor the committee uses in determining who gets in is rpi. You're just arguing to argue at this point which is nothing new with you smootness. You'd argue the sky isn't blue and the grass isn't green. It's more difficult to make the NCAA tournament for an SEC basketball team than it is for an SEC baseball team because the league as a whole has shit rpi numbers that pull everyone down.

Still just as easy as it ever was when you are one of the top 40 teams in the country.

The SEC had 9 of the top 32 baseball teams this year... 9 of the 10 that got in played for a regional championship. So, how many top 32(in reality) SEC basketball teams got left out of the tournament? Answer is zero. "Making the tournament" has little to do with making the final 16 anyway. Worthy teams get there. A crappy league doesn't hold them back. Being crappy themselves holds them back.

[shannondawg]

Nice try. Coach!

You not going to thank me for bringing the thread back up so you could get your licks in?

[smootness]

It makes it more difficult when 10 of the 14 teams have worse than 80 RPIs. The biggest factor the committee uses in determining who gets in is rpi. You're just arguing to argue at this point which is nothing new with you smootness. You'd argue the sky isn't blue and the grass isn't green. It's more difficult to make the NCAA tournament for an SEC basketball team than it is for an SEC baseball team because the league as a whole has shit rpi numbers that pull everyone down.

This is actually a fair point, and really the first that's been made in this argument.

But I'm not arguing just to argue. The bottom line is that it's just as easy for the top __ programs in college basketball to make the tournament as it is for that number of programs in baseball. It's just that in baseball, we have a better program (and the SEC has more good programs as a whole overall), so it's easier for us in baseball.

It is far easier for Duke to make the tournament in basketball than it is for them to make it in baseball. Because their basketball program is better than their baseball program. That's what it comes down to.

[smootness]

As a follow-up to the RPI argument, while it is a fair point and though the RPI certainly isn't perfect, it's designed to try to take away what you're talking about. The idea is that if you are truly a team at a certain level, your RPI will reflect that no matter the opponents...because if you're playing a bunch of bad opponents, you will win all your games.

For example, were we as good a basketball team as we are a baseball team, our RPI would not be terrible because we would win just about all of our conference games, and we would schedule more difficult OOC opponents, and our RPI would be just fine. But when you are playing bad teams and not winning, then you yourself are probably a bad team and aren't good enough to make the Tournament.

[whatever]

How does being double elimination make anything "easier"? You've simply got to win 2 basketball games in 3 days to get there. That's it. There's alot more "15/16 seeds" in baseball that have an ace that can beat you on any given day too...

It's not an opinion thing -- it's math. There is a 16/302 chance of getting it done in baseball -- and a 16/349 chance in basketball. A difference of 0.7% in difficulty.

Double elimination dictates that the WORSE teams should have less of a chance at advancing. In baseball JSU would've advanced and ULL would've been out this year, but since it was double elimination and ULL (the better team) got another shot, the better team went further. In a one-game, "knock-out" type tourney, the probability is a lot higher that the best teams won't advance. Therefore worse teams, and more teams have a better chance at making a run in basketball, not so sure why that's so hard to understand.

And to your other point, basketball has 50 or so more DI teams, another reason why it's harder in basketball.

Add to that the fact that most cold weather baseball teams don't have the same advantages that warm weather teams do, and you basically cut the field of teams you're competing with for the 64 spots in half.

In basketball the Southern teams don't have that advantage, kids aren't going to avoid going to certain schools in the North because they know they'll never be able to compete because of competitive disadvantages.

Are you trying to tell me the SAME NUMBER of teams have made the NCAA tourney in both sports? That the same number has made the round of 32? I did the research as well, and in basketball, more teams have made the field of 64, and more teams have made the round of 32 (by a significant margin). The fact that so many more teams have advanced that far means that there are many more teams that have the ability to compete in basketball

[Political Hack]

the likelihood of an underdog upsetting a powerhouse in baseball has to be much lower than basketball. It's a multi-win, multi-loss advancement/elimination format. Entirely different IMO and can't be compared in terms of which is "tougher."

From a prestige standpoint though, CWS = Final Four.

[CadaverDawg]

How does being double elimination make anything "easier"? You've simply got to win 2 basketball games in 3 days to get there. That's it. There's alot more "15/16 seeds" in baseball that have an ace that can beat you on any given day too...

It's not an opinion thing -- it's math. There is a 16/302 chance of getting it done in baseball -- and a 16/349 chance in basketball. A difference of 0.7% in difficulty.

Wrong. It IS opinion, bc it's not the same team every game in baseball. Pitchers mean everything, as do Matchups of your bats with opposing pitchers. So there are no stats to prove anything unless you have pitched the same pitcher every night all year. It's different in basketball. It's opinion, whether Engie wants to tell people it's not or not. There is no proof it's easier or harder... It's easier in baseball in my opinion.

[engie]

What I said was very, very clear. Why are you twisting it?

My point has been singularly the difficulty of making the round of 16. Upsets happen in a single game in basketball, sure. But they self-correct the deeper you go, and the round of 16 is dominated by roughly the same number of "haves" in basketball as it is in baseball -- proving the simple math already done

[engie]

Wrong. It IS opinion, bc it's not the same team every game in baseball. Pitchers mean everything, as do Matchups of your bats with opposing pitchers. So there are no stats to prove anything unless you have pitched the same pitcher every night all year. It's different in basketball. It's opinion, whether Engie wants to tell people it's not or not. There is no proof it's easier or harder... It's easier in baseball in my opinion.

Are you seriously trying to make a macro argument with this micro data?

This is simple math that you are overcomplicating to fit an idea you had on the front end.

[Coach34]

What I said was very, very clear. Why are you twisting it?

My point has been singularly the difficulty of making the round of 16. Upsets happen in a single game in basketball, sure. But they self-correct the deeper you go, and the round of 16 is dominated by roughly the same number of "haves" in basketball as it is in baseball -- proving the simple math already done

This is a great point. There may be some early upsets in the basketball tourney- but your Sweet 16 is always Power-Conference heavy

14 of the Sweet 16 in 2014 were Power Conference teams
13 of 16 in 2013...

[Homedawg]

A # 4 seed has won the national championship in baseball. The equivalent of a 13-16 seed in hoops. Name a basketball team that's won a national championship that was below a 8 seed? Which is the equivalent of a 2 seed in baseball. I actually can't remember an 8 seed winning it either.

[Coach34]

A # 4 seed has won the national championship in baseball. The equivalent of a 13-16 seed in hoops. Name a basketball team that's won a national championship that was below a 8 seed? Which is the equivalent of a 2 seed in baseball. I actually can't remember an 8 seed winning it either.

shit- name the last time a power conference team didnt win the title- in basketball?

[Dawg61]

Y'all are lumping SEC basketball in with the Power Conference stats and the last several years it's been far from that. We are a top heavy conference in basketball. Outside of four teams the rest have a more difficult task to get in than the baseball teams. I get that if you're good than you're good and you'll do it anyways but this argument isn't about that it's about the average teams. Average SEC baseball gets you into the tournament and average SEC basketball does not get you in. Once you're in either tournament you have a "punchers chance" just like the other 63 do. The committee will put a cap on SEC basketball entrees. They'll say they don't but that's simply not true. Going into the basketball selection process they already know that there's no way they'll allow 6 SEC basketball teams in. Same in baseball except that number is 11 or 12. So if you finish 11-7 in SEC play in basketball and all your losses are against the top 4 teams you're shit out of luck. The committee won't put you in. Not true in baseball. You finish top 10 in the SEC in baseball and you're in.

[Coach34]

This is a great point. There may be some early upsets in the basketball tourney- but your Sweet 16 is always Power-Conference heavy

14 of the Sweet 16 in 2014 were Power Conference teams
13 of 16 in 2013...

and to add to that point I made:

the power conferences only get about 50% of the bids- but they almost always make-up 75% or more of the Sweet 16

[Dawg61]

and to add to that point I made:

the power conferences only get about 50% of the bids- but they almost always make-up 75% or more of the Sweet 16

MSU isn't in the Power Conferences in the committee's eyes. They separate Florida, Kentucky, Mizzou and Tennessee in basketball from the rest of us 10. They do and you know they do. The other 10 of us have a much steeper hill to climb to get in in basketball. We just do.

[Coach34]

MSU isn't in the Power Conferences in the committee's eyes. They separate Florida, Kentucky, Mizzou and Tennessee in basketball from the rest of us 10. They do and you know they do. The other 10 of us have a much steeper hill to climb to get in in basketball. We just do.

Thats not true at all. We were a 2 seed in 2004 for crying out loud. And STILL shit the bed.

It comes down to the fact that SEC baseball = Big East basketball (and yes I know the Big East is no more)

SEC basketball doesnt have as many good programs as SEC baseball does. It's not harder for SEC teams to make the Sweet 16 in basketball because basketball is tougher- it's harder because SEC basketball just doesnt have as many good programs.

[Dawg61]

Thats not true at all. We were a 2 seed in 2004 for crying out loud. And STILL shit the bed.

It comes down to the fact that SEC baseball = Big East basketball (and yes I know the Big East is no more)

SEC basketball doesnt have as many good programs as SEC baseball does. It's not harder for SEC teams to make the Sweet 16 in basketball because basketball is tougher- it's harder because SEC basketball just doesnt have as many good programs.

I said in the last few years that SEC basketball has really tumbled. Not 2004. In 2004 the SEC was ranked as a much tougher basketball conference. Now we fall behind the Mountain West. Thanks for making my point in the bolded part. If MSU is the 5th best basketball team in the SEC and only losses to the top 4 SEC teams and win every other game we still won't get into the tournament because our RPI would be too low.

[Coach34]

If MSU is the 5th best basketball team in the SEC and only losses to the top 4 SEC teams and win every other game we still won't get into the tournament because our RPI would be too low.

That's usually because our OOC schedule was embarassing. If State and some of the other SEC schools would play a big boy OOC- then that wouldnt be a problem

[Dawg61]

That's usually because our OOC schedule was embarassing. If State and some of the other SEC schools would play a big boy OOC- then that wouldnt be a problem

Yup very true and it will take all the teams working together to strengthen their OOC schedules and actually winning those games to get the SEC out of this reoccurring hole it is in in basketball. I do believe Slive has emphasized this and is holding all the schools accountable to schedule more difficult OOC schedules.

[engie]

Y'all are lumping SEC basketball in with the Power Conference stats and the last several years it's been far from that. We are a top heavy conference in basketball. Outside of four teams the rest have a more difficult task to get in than the baseball teams. I get that if you're good than you're good and you'll do it anyways but this argument isn't about that it's about the average teams. Average SEC baseball gets you into the tournament and average SEC basketball does not get you in. Once you're in either tournament you have a "punchers chance" just like the other 63 do. The committee will put a cap on SEC basketball entrees. They'll say they don't but that's simply not true. Going into the basketball selection process they already know that there's no way they'll allow 6 SEC basketball teams in. Same in baseball except that number is 11 or 12. So if you finish 11-7 in SEC play in basketball and all your losses are against the top 4 teams you're shit out of luck. The committee won't put you in. Not true in baseball. You finish top 10 in the SEC in baseball and you're in.

You are, again, overcomplicating something simple. If you are one of the best 40 teams in basketball in a given year, guess what? You are in the tournament. Even at it's worse, the league doesn't and hasn't prevented decent teams from making the tournament. The league gets 10 in in baseball because 10 deserve to be in based on their body of work. The league gets 4 in in basketball for the same reason. The committee doesn't "cap" squat -- and the SEC hasn't had teams unfairly left out either. If we had, we would have won the NIT a few times in the past 8 years.

Even as "down" as the SEC has been recently, there is still a clear divide between us and the midmajor conferences. Though I fully expect the former Big 6 to be a Big 7 now though with the Big East/American split and expansions. There was a big 5 in baseball -- and could be argued as a Big 4 or Big 6 depending on the Big East and West Coast Conference on any given year.

[Political Hack]

This is a great point. There may be some early upsets in the basketball tourney- but your Sweet 16 is always Power-Conference heavy

14 of the Sweet 16 in 2014 were Power Conference teams
13 of 16 in 2013...

"power conferences" are less relevant in baseball though. Cal St Fullerton and Rice come to mind. Baseball has some mid majors with great tradition. Basketball and football don't really.

[Dawg61]

It's more difficult for an SEC basketball team to be in the top 40 in RPI in basketball than it is in baseball outside the top 4 teams. The number 5 team in the SEC will be in the top 40 in baseball but won't be in basketball. Even without losing any other games during the season except to the top 4 teams in the SEC that basketball team will not be in the top 40. Why? Because the number 6 team in the Big East, ACC, B1G, Pac12, AAC, and Big 12 will be above them plus the #2 team in the mid-majors and all the teams ranked higher in their respective leagues. Nothing can be done about that right now unless ALL the SEC teams start scheduling top 25 OOC schedules and actually win those games.

[engie]

"power conferences" are less relevant in baseball though. Cal St Fullerton and Rice come to mind. Baseball has some mid majors with great tradition. Basketball and football don't really.

Baseball has 2 or 3 elite midmajors. That's some combination of Rice, Fullerton, Irvine, Wichita St, Tulane...

Basketball had 4 or 5 prior to the last round of expansion. That's some combination of Memphis, Butler, Gonzaga, VCU, Wichita St, Temple...

[engie]

Where is your disconnect here?


It's more difficult for an SEC basketball team to be in the top 40 in RPI in basketball than it is in baseball outside the top 4 teams.
Yeah -- about 0.7% more difficult -- as already shown in this thread and the other one.


The number 5 team in the SEC will be in the top 40 in baseball but won't be in basketball.
That's because the #5 team in baseball IS one of the 40 best teams in the country, while the #5 team in baskeball has been debatable lately. RPI isn't "punishing" SEC teams. SUCKING is punishing SEC teams.


Even without losing any other games during the season except to the top 4 teams in the SEC that basketball team will not be in the top 40.
BS. RPI isn't a discriminatory formula.


Because the number 6 team in the Big East, ACC, B1G, Pac12, AAC, and Big 12 will be above them plus the #2 team in the mid-majors and all the teams ranked higher in their respective leagues.
And they will be ranked above them because they are BETTER than them.


Nothing can be done about that right now unless ALL the SEC teams start scheduling top 25 OOC schedules and actually win those games.
All that needs to happen is for the teams to improve. The rest of it, RPI and such, takes care of itself.

[Dawg61]

Nope it is much more difficult for the #5 team in the SEC in basketball to make the tournament than it is for the rest of the Power 6 conferences and the exact opposite is true in baseball. MSU has almost no control over the conferences strength in RPI. Do me a favor and add up all the SEC entries for the NCAA tournament for the last ten years in basketball and baseball and compare it to the rest of the Power6 conferences. You'll quickly see it is easier to make the NCAA tournament for an SEC baseball team than it is for an SEC basketball team.

[sandwolf]

Do me a favor and add up all the SEC entries for the NCAA tournament for the last ten years in basketball and baseball and compare it to the rest of the Power6 conferences. You'll quickly see it is easier to make the NCAA tournament for an SEC baseball team than it is for an SEC basketball team.

I would interpret that to mean that the SEC is simply better at baseball than at basketball. Its not like we have a bunch of deserving basketball teams getting left out of the tournament every year. Nor do we have a bunch of undeserving baseball teams going to the tournament every year.

[engie]

I would interpret that to mean that the SEC is simply better at baseball than at basketball. Its not like we have a bunch of deserving basketball teams getting left out of the tournament every year. Nor do we have a bunch of undeserving baseball teams going to the tournament every year.

Exactly.

Dawg61 is just disconnecting from reality per the norm...

[smootness]

Nope it is much more difficult for the #5 team in the SEC in basketball to make the tournament than it is for the rest of the Power 6 conferences and the exact opposite is true in baseball. MSU has almost no control over the conferences strength in RPI. Do me a favor and add up all the SEC entries for the NCAA tournament for the last ten years in basketball and baseball and compare it to the rest of the Power6 conferences. You'll quickly see it is easier to make the NCAA tournament for an SEC baseball team than it is for an SEC basketball team.

Because the SEC truly isn't a very good basketball league and doesn't have very many good basketball teams. That is why the #5 team in the SEC has a difficult time making the tournament - because if they were truly a definite tournament team, they would be better than the #5 team in the current SEC.

[Dawg61]

If 10 of 14 make a tournament of 64 and 4 of 14 make a tournament of 64 which tournament is more difficult to get to 16? Engie's answer "the Big East got 8". It's more difficult for MSU to make the NCAA basketball tournament than the baseball tournament. Just is. How many times Arizona and Michigan made the sweet 16 has nothing to do with it.

[smootness]

If 10 of 14 make a tournament of 64 and 4 of 14 make a tournament of 64 which tournament is more difficult to get to 16? Engie's answer "the Big East got 8". It's more difficult for MSU to make the NCAA basketball tournament than the baseball tournament. Just is. How many times Arizona and Michigan made the sweet 16 has nothing to do with it.

This is just not a logical argument. If the SEC suddenly has 8 great basketball teams next year, I can assure you they will get 8 teams into the tournament. You're taking the fact that the SEC doesn't currently have a lot of good basketball teams and using that to make the argument that the Tournament is biased against the SEC. It doesn't make sense.

Is it easier for Mississippi State to make the tournament in baseball than it is for Ohio State? It is currently, but only because we have a better program. At the beginning of the year, without looking at the teams' rosters, both teams have the same chance. If Ohio State were as good as we've been the last few years, they would own the Big 10 and would easily make the tournament. But they aren't as good. It has nothing to do with B10 vs. SEC.

How does Indiana keep making the tournament? They're a good team; it isn't harder for them because they're in the Big 10. They're better than everyone else in the Big 10, so it's fairly simple for them - just keep beating everybody in that conference (like you should b/c you're better than all of them), and you get in.

[Dawg61]

Because the SEC truly isn't a very good basketball league and doesn't have very many good basketball teams. That is why the #5 team in the SEC has a difficult time making the tournament - because if they were truly a definite tournament team, they would be better than the #5 team in the current SEC.

Not necessarily. That #5 team could only lose to 1-4 the entire season and have zero other losses the rest of the season including OOC and most likely will not get into the tournament. That's just the #5 team. Still got 6-10 getting in in baseball.

[smootness]

Not necessarily. That #5 team could only lose to 1-4 the entire season and have zero other losses the rest of the season including OOC and most likely will not get into the tournament. That's just the #5 team. Still got 6-10 getting in in baseball.

You've gotta be kidding me. Let's say they play 5 games against those 4 teams - they go 13-5 in the SEC and only lose 5 games all year, and you're telling me they're not in?

Worst-case scenario, they happen to play those 4 teams a total of 8 games. 1) They still go 10-8 in the SEC and only have 8 losses; probably going to get into the tournament no matter what.

And if they go 0-8 against those 4, there's probably a huge gap between #4 and #5. And even still, if those 4 are so good, their RPIs will all be plenty high, and those losses won't hurt as much; their RPI will still probably be enough to get in. Unless they schedule a bunch of teams with a 250 RPI in the OOC schedule, and that's on them. That has nothing to do with the SEC at that point.

You can literally say the same about any other conference. If a team is the #5 team in the ACC but happens to play the top 4 teams a total of 8 times and loses all of them, their ACC record won't look great. And if they schedule a bunch of 250-RPI teams OOC, guess what? They're not making the tournament.

[engie]

Nope it is much more difficult for the #5 team in the SEC in basketball to make the tournament than it is for the rest of the Power 6 conferences and the exact opposite is true in baseball. MSU has almost no control over the conferences strength in RPI. Do me a favor and add up all the SEC entries for the NCAA tournament for the last ten years in basketball and baseball and compare it to the rest of the Power6 conferences. You'll quickly see it is easier to make the NCAA tournament for an SEC baseball team than it is for an SEC basketball team.

You don't have a logical bone in your body.

[Dawg61]

No you're wrong. There's factors hurting the Ohio State in baseball just like there is hurting MSU in baseball. Ohio State has to DESTROY the Big Ten in baseball to get in just like MSU has to do in the SEC in basketball. But the conferences aren't terrible so forcing a team to go 25-5 in basketball is still hard as fu*k to do because our competition isn't that bad.

It's like asking Golfer A to shoot a 72 from the back tees to get in and Golfer B to shoot a 64 from the front tees to get in. It's still difficult as fu*k to shoot a 64.

[engie]

Not necessarily. That #5 team could only lose to 1-4 the entire season and have zero other losses the rest of the season including OOC and most likely will not get into the tournament. That's just the #5 team. Still got 6-10 getting in in baseball.

Stupidity on display for the world to see.

[Dawg61]

You don't have a logical bone in your body.

How many Big East teams made the Sweet 16 though?**

[engie]

No you're wrong. There's factors hurting the Ohio State in baseball just like there is hurting MSU in baseball. Ohio State has to DESTROY the Big Ten in baseball to get in just like MSU has to do in the SEC in basketball. But the conferences aren't terrible so forcing a team to go 25-5 in basketball is still hard as fu*k to do because our competition isn't that bad.

It's like asking Golfer A to shoot a 72 from the back tees to get in and Golfer B to shoot a 64 from the front tees to get in. It's still difficult as fu*k to shoot a 64.

You don't understand a damn thing about what RPI actually does do you?

Yep. It's DISCRIMINATION!!!1!1 The committee in basketball is DISCRIMINATING against deserving SEC teams!!1!1 Only made 1 championship game in the Nit in the last 8 years(a loss)? Just a big conspiracy to keep out worthy SEC teams!11!1!1

[smootness]

Our competition in basketball doesn't seem that bad because we are bad. If we were as good in basketball as we are in baseball, going 11-5 in conference wouldn't seem difficult at all. You're not forcing a team to do anything. It's all based on how good your competition is. If all the SEC teams were suddenly much better next year, we wouldn't have to go 11-5 to get in.

Your golfer analogy is insane. The actual analogy would be one golfer who hits his drives 375 and another who hits his 275. And the goal for both of them is simply to shoot a lower score than the other. Yes, it is easier for the golfer who drives it 100 yards further to win...because he's better. There is no inherent bias against the golfer who doesn't hit it as far.

Indiana went 21-3 in the Big 10 this year. Indiana was a good team, they were not a great team. They went 21-3 in the Big 10 because the Big 10 is not good. Had they been in the SEC, they probably would have been something like 16-14 in conference. Guess what? Both accomplish the same thing - either way, they're definitely in the NCAA tournament. No, they couldn't get in at 16-14 in the Big 10. But if they had gone 16-14 in the Big 10, they wouldn't be very good.

[Dawg61]

I know it's more difficult for MSU to make the basketball tournament than the baseball tournament. That part escapes you. How many Big East teams made it though? That's what matters.**

[engie]

How many Big East teams made the Sweet 16 though?**

Last 10 years
Big East - 74 teams in, 174 games played. Teams play an avg of 2.351gms
B1G - 58 teams in, 147 games played. Teams play an avg of 2.534gms
Big12 - 56 teams in, 127 games played. Teams play an avg of 2.268gms
ACC - 52 teams in, 122 games played. Teams play an avg of 2.346gms
SEC - 44 teams in, 113 games played. Teams play an avg of 2.568gms
Pac12 - 44 teams in, 103 games played. Teams play an avg of 2.341gms
A10 - 31 teams in, 57 games played. Teams play an avg of 1.84gms
Mountain West - 27 teams in, 44 games played. Teams play an avg of 1.63gms
CUsa - 16 teams in, 36 games played. Teams play an avg of 2.25gms
Horizon - 10 teams in, 27 games played. Teams play an avg of 2.7gms

The SEC is NOT a big 6 basketball league!!!1!1! Just played over double the number of tournament games as the next league in the pecking order.

What in this data shows the SEC getting screwed?

[engie]

Indiana went 21-3 in the Big 10 this year. Indiana was a good team, they were not a great team. They went 21-3 in the Big 10 because the Big 10 is not good. Had they been in the SEC, they probably would have been something like 16-14 in conference. Guess what? Both accomplish the same thing - either way, they're definitely in the NCAA tournament. No, they couldn't get in at 16-14 in the Big 10. But if they had gone 16-14 in the Big 10, they wouldn't be very good.

And in both cases, their RPI would have been nearly the same. Because that's the goal of RPI -- to determine and rank how good a team actually is, regardless of the competition they face.

[Dawg61]

Indiana isn't the problem for the B1G. Indiana gets in. The problem for the B1G is the #3-4 teams trying to get in. Would MSU go 21-3 in the B1G this year? No fu*king way and you're lying if you say we would.

[smootness]

Indiana isn't the problem for the B1G. Indiana gets in. The problem for the B1G is the #3-4 teams trying to get in. Would MSU go 21-3 in the B1G this year? No fu*king way and you're lying if you say we would.

You've lost it. Yes, State would have destroyed the Big 10. The Big 10 doesn't get many teams in the tournament because they don't have many good teams worthy of being in the tournament.

I used Indiana because they're one of the only ones worthy. If Ohio State was as good as we are, or as good as any tournament-worthy SEC team, they wouldn't be a problem, either; they would be in. Because they would have dominated that conference.

Indiana dominated the conference because they're good.

I honestly have no idea what you're arguing anymore. 'Indiana isn't the problem, they get in'....uh, yes. Not because they're Indiana, but because they're good.

ETA: You know how we throttled Missouri, Auburn, and Tennessee? Went a combined 8-1 against them? Well, hello Big 10.

[Dawg61]

You're going back too far and all you're doing is counting Kentucky, Florida and Tennessee basically over and over and over. That has nothing to do with it being more difficult to get into the tournament for the current #5 team today than it was in 2004. The SEC has tumbled in conference rankings from today to what it was in 2004. Counting how many wins it got in the 2004 tournament does nothing.

[smootness]

The SEC has tumbled in conference rankings from today to what it was in 2004.

Because. there. aren't. as. many. good. teams.

The conference has tumbled in conference rankings because the conference isn't as good. The conference isn't as good because there aren't as many good teams. The conference gets fewer teams in the tournament because there aren't as many good teams.

Do you honestly believe the reason the SEC gets fewer teams in now than before is because everyone has just decided the SEC isn't as good? That there are just as many worthy teams as there were then, but bias is excluding them?

[Dawg61]

Yea State would do well in the B1G but I don't know about destroy. 24 games means we run up against 8 #1 starters and our offense is dogshit so I think 16-8, 15-9 is probably about our record. We wouldn't get in. Glad we are in the SEC for baseball. Wish we were in the B1G for basketball.

[Dawg61]

No I think it's more difficult to get into the NCAA tournament for basketball for an SEC school than it is for baseball.

[smootness]

Yea State would do well in the B1G but I don't know about destroy. 24 games means we run up against 8 #1 starters and our offense is dogshit so I think 16-8, 15-9 is probably about our record. We wouldn't get in. Glad we are in the SEC for baseball. Wish we were in the B1G for basketball.

Facepalm. I honestly don't know what to say to you at this point.

We ran up against Missouri and Tennessee's #1 starters, too. It didn't matter. Why? Because our offense looks worse because we're in the SEC. Big 10 pitchers, even #1 starters, on average, are nowhere near as good as in the SEC.

I'm done with this argument. It can't be stated any more plainly than it has been. You literally think conference reputation gets underserving teams in and leaves deserving ones out. You believe our team this year, which was good enough to win 18 SEC games, wouldn't get in the tournament were we in the Big 10. You believe an 18-12 SEC team is equitable to a 15-9 Big 10 team. I can't help you.

[Dawg61]

Never said conference reputation gets undeserving teams in. You did. I just simply said it's a more difficult feat to get into the NCAA tournament in basketball than in baseball for an SEC school.

[smootness]

Never said conference reputation gets undeserving teams in. You did. I just simply said it's a more difficult feat to get into the NCAA tournament in basketball than in baseball for an SEC school.

I don't know why I keep coming back to this, but you said we wouldn't get in as a Big 10 team, but we clearly were deserving as an SEC team. So though you may not realize it, you are in fact stating that conference reputation leaves deserving teams out, and the obvious deduction is that undeserving teams also get in for the same reason.

And your statement that it is more difficult for an SEC basketball team to get in than an SEC baseball team, without any discussion of individual team quality, also says as much.

And your belief that the #5 SEC team won't get in, regardless of how good they actually are, also says as much.

That is your argument. You just didn't realize it until now.

[jalakin]

And what smoot and everyone else is trying to say is that is because the teams playing in the SEC in basketball aren't that great, whereas in baseball they are great. The conference gets less teams in for basketball because we have less worthy teams.

[engie]

And what smoot and everyone else is trying to say is that is because the teams playing in the SEC in basketball aren't that great, whereas in baseball they are great. The conference gets less teams in for basketball because we have less worthy teams.

This statement has been given to him 10 times already... He doesn't possess the logic to comprehend it...

[Dawg61]

No you're just not getting what I'm attempting very poorly to say. You are completely ignoring the "upset factor" or "punchers chance" or whatever you want to call it. On any given day the worse team can pull the upset. It happens all the time. MSU loses to Holy Cross. Shit like that. Indiana doesn't get the luxury of the upset loss on their schedule. They must destroy the B1G to get in and they did. But that makes it more difficult for them. They can not afford the luxury of having off days or upset losses. That's why it's more difficult for the #5 team in SEC basketball. Their resume must be pristine vs 8-14. No room for "upset factor" or they get eliminated and the team from the stronger power conference gets in.

[smootness]

Dawg61, do you believe a 10-8 ACC basketball team is roughly equitable to a 10-8 SEC basketball team, given the current state of the two conferences?

[engie]

No you're just not getting what I'm attempting very poorly to say. You are completely ignoring the "upset factor" or "punchers chance" or whatever you want to call it.
I've already statistically accounted for the "upset factor" and shown it to exist in each of the two sports roughly equally.


On any given day the worse team can pull the upset. It happens all the time. MSU loses to Holy Cross. Shit like that.
And? The better team doesn't always win in any sport known to man. That's why games are played instead of just deciding who is better in pregame warmups and giving them the W.


Indiana doesn't get the luxury of the upset loss on their schedule. They must destroy the B1G to get in and they did. But that makes it more difficult for them. They can not afford the luxury of having off days or upset losses.
Really? So, you are telling me that they didn't lose to #188 Utah, #164 Jacksonville, #110 Michigan, #184 Morehead St, and #116 Minnesota THIS YEAR? I just dreamed those up, right? They actually never happened. Did you halfass think maybe you should crosscheck before using them as the staple of your position?


That's why it's more difficult for the #5 team in SEC basketball. Their resume must be pristine vs 8-14. No room for "upset factor" or they get eliminated and the team from the stronger power conference gets in.
This is bullshit. If these SEC teams that "got screwed" for having "no margin for error" were so damn good and deserving, why did ZERO of them make the NIT Elite 8? 32 team NIT with 4 SEC teams and ZERO of them make the Elite 8. SURE, they "got screwed" by the system -- had nothing to do with them being UNDESERVING TEAMS...

[Dawg61]

Dawg61, do you believe a 10-8 ACC basketball team is roughly equitable to a 10-8 SEC basketball team, given the current state of the two conferences?

Why do I get the feeling this is a baited question? The answer is no and the 10-8 SEC team wouldn't get in unless they are a Kentucky or Florida but the ACC team would most likely and I'm fine with that. The one I am not fine with is the 12-6 SEC team not getting in when the 10-8 ACC team does. Honestly I'd just like the basketball tournament to expand to 96 teams and give the top 32 a first round bye. Then I can shut the fu*k up about which is more difficult.

[Dawg61]

Indiana went 21-3 and won the B1G regular season and conference tournament. Why would I need to "crosscheck" their schedule? Nice to see you've made the NIT Final Four as your determining factor on the teams that should of gotten in. Teams that feel slighted usually don't give a **** about winning the NIT and they just lose and go home.

[smootness]

Why do I get the feeling this is a baited question? The answer is no and the 10-8 SEC team wouldn't get in unless they are a Kentucky or Florida but the ACC team would most likely and I'm fine with that. The one I am not fine with is the 12-6 SEC team not getting in when the 10-8 ACC team does. Honestly I'd just like the basketball tournament to expand to 96 teams and give the top 32 a first round bye. Then I can shut the fu*k up about which is more difficult.

Wasn't a baited question, just honestly wanted to know. So you obviously believe there actually is a difference in the quality of a conference like the ACC and the SEC.

And I may or may not be fine with a 12-6 SEC team not making it over a 10-8 ACC team, depending on how good the conferences were that year. Obviously I think you would be ok with a 10-8 ACC team making it over a 12-6 Atlantic Sun team, so obviously it's all relative. If there was a year in which the SEC was truly bad, with hardly any decent teams, and a team went 12-6, that doesn't automatically make them worthy to me. If they didn't prove anything in the OOC, I would be ok with that team being left out.

I think the point you're trying to make is that it is harder for an SEC basketball team that is .500 (9-9) to make it than an SEC baseball team who is .500 (15-15). And you're correct. But our argument is that it is easier to go 9-9 in basketball in the SEC than it is to go 15-15 in baseball. And I think you would agree with that, based on the fact that you do believe it is harder to go 10-8 in the SEC than 10-8 in the ACC.

And if a team is slipping up against weak teams (your Big 10 vs. SEC baseball argument) and also not beating any good teams, then I don't believe that team is worthy. If a team slips up against a couple of weak teams but also beats some good teams, they might be. If a team doesn't slip up against any weak teams, even if they don't really beat many good teams, and just about runs the table, no matter the competition, then they're probably worthy as well.

It's all about what you do on the field. The teams who are worthy prove it, no matter the competition. The same is true for those who aren't worthy. If you're playing weak competition and not just about running the table, you didn't prove yourself worthy. If you're playing good competition and getting beat consistently, you didn't prove yourself worthy.

But the level of competition doesn't make it harder or easier for a truly worthy team to get in. They'll prove it either way.

[engie]

Indiana went 21-3 and won the B1G regular season and conference tournament. Why would I need to "crosscheck" their schedule? Nice to see you've made the NIT Final Four as your determining factor on the teams that should of gotten in. Teams that feel slighted usually don't give a **** about winning the NIT and they just lose and go home.

How do you account for Nebraska getting in?

So, your argument is propped up by an autobid? One that actually had a half dozen bad losses that YOU said they "couldn't afford"? Dawg61 pls.

[Dawg61]

Well thought out message, thank you. The teams that make it in are not the problem and I'm not necessarily saying there is a problem YET but let me ask you a question Smoot. Which in your opinion is more difficult to do, be a 12-6 SEC basketball team and not make the tournament or be a 14-16 SEC baseball team and make the tournament (we had 2 14-16 teams make it this year)?

[engie]

Well thought out message, thank you. The teams that make it in are not the problem and I'm not necessarily saying there is a problem YET but let me ask you a question Smoot. Which in your opinion is more difficult to do, be a 12-6 SEC basketball team and not make the tournament or be a 14-16 SEC baseball team and make the tournament (we had 2 14-16 teams make it this year)?

There is no fair method to answer that question. It depends on a million possible factors, not the least of which is a TREMENDOUS variance in conference SOS now...

If a 14-16 SEC baseball team has an RPI in the 60s, they should be left at home. The two this year had RPIs of #21 and #31. Obviously good enough to make the tournament.
If a 12-6 basketball team has an RPI in the 60s, they should be left at home. Georgia deserved to be left at home at #72, while Kentucky deserved to make it at #7. Also, how Tennessee deserved to make it at 11-7 with an RPI of 37.

The core problem here is you failing to understand what RPI is attempting to do and how it is accomplished...

[Dawg61]

How do you account for Nebraska getting in?

So, your argument is propped up by an autobid? One that actually had a half dozen bad losses that YOU said they "couldn't afford"? Dawg61 pls.

Why is this suddenly morphing into a B1G baseball discussion? Indiana went 21-3 dude. A .875 winning percentage looks way better than a few upset losses. Then they won their fu*king conference tournament. They are in. Twice.

I'm not saying I necessarily have a problem with how the baseball and basketball teams are selected I am just saying it is more difficult to be teams 1-4 in SEC basketball than it is to be teams 7-10 in SEC baseball. Let's get off the B1G baseball please, I don't really care to get balls deep in that conference's baseball situation.

[engie]

I'm not saying I necessarily have a problem with how the baseball and basketball teams are selected I am just saying it is more difficult to be teams 1-4 in SEC basketball than it is to be teams 7-10 in SEC baseball.

And again, you are breaking it down relative to the conference(which doesn't matter) instead of relative to the country(which is what gets you in or out).

[Dawg61]

The core problem here is you failing to understand what RPI is attempting to do and how it is accomplished...

No the core problem is that I have an OPINION that you don't agree with. That's fine. My opinion is that it is more difficult to make the NCAA tournament in basketball than in baseball for an SEC school. We don't and won't agree on everything.

[CadaverDawg]

No the core problem is that I have an OPINION that you don't agree with. That's fine. My opinion is that it is more difficult to make the NCAA tournament in basketball than in baseball for an SEC school. We don't and won't agree on everything.

You ****ed up now**

[smootness]

Well thought out message, thank you. The teams that make it in are not the problem and I'm not necessarily saying there is a problem YET but let me ask you a question Smoot. Which in your opinion is more difficult to do, be a 12-6 SEC basketball team and not make the tournament or be a 14-16 SEC baseball team and make the tournament (we had 2 14-16 teams make it this year)?

It all depends on the quality of the conference in that given year. If the SEC was as bad as it's ever been in basketball and an absolute bear in baseball, it might be easier to get into the baseball tourney at 14-16.

If the SEC was decent in basketball and not as good as normal in baseball, it would absolutely be easier to make it in at 12-6 in basketball.

I don't believe, btw, that it's tougher to be 1-4 in basketball than 7-10 in baseball. I think we have more good baseball programs than we do basketball programs. The #7 program in baseball has already done the work to establish themselves as a good baseball program; they aren't granted that simply by being in the SEC. Just as the #6 basketball program is only an average basketball program, they haven't been able to build themselves up as a good program yet; again, they aren't denied anything just because they're in the SEC.

[Dawg61]

they aren't denied anything just because they're in the SEC. Then how does the team that goes 12-6 and only losses to the top 4 teams get in? Teams 6-14 will have bad RPI's and won't help them. They must then schedule a top 25 OOC and win those games to get in. A tougher task than the #10 team in baseball must accomplish.

[smootness]

Then how does the team that goes 12-6 and only losses to the top 4 teams get in? Teams 6-14 will have bad RPI's and won't help them. They must then schedule a top 25 OOC and win those games to get in. A tougher task than the #10 team in baseball must accomplish.

If those top 4 teams are all really, really good, then they don't have to go crazy OOC to get in. If any of those top 4 aren't all that great, then #5 probably isn't that great, either, even at 12-6.

I promise you if they have 6 losses against top 20 RPI teams and beat everybody else in conference, and then schedule halfway decent in the non-conference schedule and don't slip up, they'll be fine.

[Dawg61]

If those top 4 teams are all really, really good, then they don't have to go crazy OOC to get in. If any of those top 4 aren't all that great, then #5 probably isn't that great, either, even at 12-6.

I promise you if they have 6 losses against top 20 RPI teams and beat everybody else in conference, and then schedule halfway decent in the non-conference schedule and don't slip up, they'll be fine.

Hope so because if by some miracle in the next 4 years we can finish #5 in basketball I fear that we will not be fine and we'll get left in the cold but why worry about that because that ain't happening any year soon.

[engie]

You ****ed up now**

Lock it up!!11!1

[engie]

Then how does the team that goes 12-6 and only losses to the top 4 teams get in? Teams 6-14 will have bad RPI's and won't help them. They must then schedule a top 25 OOC and win those games to get in. A tougher task than the #10 team in baseball must accomplish.

When in history has this happened? That team gets in 100% of the time assuming they didn't go sub 500 in the noncon.

You are STILL not understanding RPI and how it relates in all of this. Instead delving into theoretical situations that have never happened a single time in the history of the conference.

[smootness]

Let me ask you another question, Dawg61. Do you think it's harder for Florida to make the NCAA Tournament in basketball than it is for Tennessee to make it in baseball?

[Dawg61]

Let me ask you another question, Dawg61. Do you think it's harder for Florida to make the NCAA Tournament in basketball than it is for Tennessee to make it in baseball?

Bad comparison. Florida has been dominant in basketball since Donovan took over. They are a top 10 maybe top 5 basketball program. Tennessee doesn't give a shit about baseball. They are attempting to act like they give a shit by hiring Serrano and I do expect them to be back in very soon. They also went to Omaha in 2005. Bad comparison.

[smootness]

Bad comparison. Florida has been dominant in basketball since Donovan took over. They are a top 10 maybe top 5 basketball program. Tennessee doesn't give a shit about baseball. They are attempting to act like they give a shit by hiring Serrano and I do expect them to be back in very soon. They also went to Omaha in 2005. Bad comparison.

It's not a bad comparison. It proves that you can't make blanket statements without looking at the quality of individual teams/leagues.

It is easier for Florida to make the tournament in basketball because they're a better basketball program. In reality, though, both programs have the same chance. It's easier for South Carolina to make it in baseball than it is for them to make it in basketball.

But it proves that if you're good enough in basketball, you can easily make the tournament, just like good baseball programs easily make the tournament. There are just far more Florida's in the SEC in baseball than there are in basketball.

[Dawg61]

But it proves that if you're good enough in basketball, you can easily make the tournament, just like good baseball programs easily make the tournament. There are just far more Florida's in the SEC in baseball than there are in basketball.

Thanks for wasting half a day to prove my point. There are far more Florida's in the SEC in baseball than there are in basketball making it FAR MORE EASIER TO MAKE THE NCAA TOURNAMENT IN BASEBALL THAN IN BASKETBALL FOR AN SEC SCHOOL. It is much easier to build a great baseball program in the SEC than a basketball program. That's it. That's all I'm saying. To make the NCAA tournament FOR AN SEC TEAM ONLY is much easier in baseball than it is in basketball. Someone grab a shotgun and shoot my head off please.

[smootness]

Thanks for wasting half a day to prove my point. There are far more Florida's in the SEC in baseball than there are in basketball making it FAR MORE EASIER TO MAKE THE NCAA TOURNAMENT IN BASEBALL THAN IN BASKETBALL FOR AN SEC SCHOOL. It is much easier to build a great baseball program in the SEC than a basketball program. That's it. That's all I'm saying. To make the NCAA tournament FOR AN SEC TEAM ONLY is much easier in baseball than it is in basketball. Someone grab a shotgun and shoot my head off please.

Yet another facepalm. That is not your point. It is easier for a good program to make it than for a bad program. The fact that there are more good baseball programs is the reason more SEC teams make it in baseball, not because it's inherently easier. As Florida has proven, if you are good in basketball, it is just as easy for you to make it from the SEC. But you have to be good. There are not many good programs in the SEC in basketball. In the past, there were more good basketball programs in the SEC, thus why more teams made the tournament every year.

So, let me ask this - is it easy for Georgia to make the NCAA tournament in baseball? Clearly it isn't. Why? They're in the SEC, it should be easy. Oh, right, because they themselves are not good. That's all it comes down to - conference affiliation means nothing when it's time to pick the teams who make it in.

[Dawg61]

Georgia in the last ten years has made the NCAA baseball tournament 5 times and made it to Omaha 3 TIMES!! Including being the National Runner Up in 2008. Georgia in basketball has been to the NCAA tournament twice in the last ten years and one of those they had to win the SEC Tournament to get the auto-bid. It's easier to make it in baseball for SEC schools. Just agree with me please and we can end this debate. Forever.

[smootness]

Georgia in the last ten years has made the NCAA baseball tournament 5 times and made it to Omaha 3 TIMES!! Including being the National Runner Up in 2008. Georgia in basketball has been to the NCAA tournament twice in the last ten years and one of those they had to win the SEC Tournament to get the auto-bid. It's easier to make it in baseball for SEC schools. Just agree with me please and we can end this debate. Forever.

Well, my example sucked haha. But no, it is not inherently easier for anyone to make the tournament in baseball over basketball. It all comes down to how good the team is, as has been said a million times.

[engie]

Georgia in the last ten years has made the NCAA baseball tournament 5 times and made it to Omaha 3 TIMES!! Including being the National Runner Up in 2008. Georgia in basketball has been to the NCAA tournament twice in the last ten years and one of those they had to win the SEC Tournament to get the auto-bid. It's easier to make it in baseball for SEC schools. Just agree with me please and we can end this debate. Forever.

triple facepalm

68 of 349 make the basketball tourney. That's 19.5% of teams that make the tournament.
64 of 302 make the baseball tourney. That's 21.1% of teams that make the tournament.

It's 1.6% easier to make the tournament in baseball. There. Proof that "it's easier in baseball."

Both tournaments involve about the 50 best teams and a bunch of autobids. 50 BEST TEAMS. That's the key word. Overcomplicating it down to individual situations is negligible and redundant. Every time the SEC had one of the 50 best teams, they got in the basketball and baseball tournaments, with about an equal number of legitimate gripes in each sport.

[Coach34]

How in the mother-****ing-**** is this thread still going????

[Dawg61]

How in the mother-****ing-**** is this thread still going????

Lol I'm partial to blame here, sorry

[CadaverDawg]

How in the mother-****ing-**** is this thread still going????

Don't lock it!!!!111 Engine has to have the last word or he'll shed tearzzz!!1!11!

*

[engie]

Don't lock it!!!!111 Engine has to have the last word or he'll shed tearzzz!!1!11!

*

I'm shocked it's still open now that cadeverrrr has spokennnn!111!1

"Engie tearzzzz -- yet Cadever can't make a post all day on a single topic without obsessing about Engie in 5 different threads!!111!11"

This is where you call the kettle black -- again... LOCK IT UP!11!1

[CadaverDawg]

Haha see