We won't be hosting despite being 17-13. (I mean, maybe a deep run in Hoover could get us back on the hosting bubble, but the committee tends to lazily pick the hosts before then anyway.)
Had we played a harder non-conference schedule, not a "hard" one, just not so many Q4 games, we would be solidly hosting. Usually 17-13 SEC teams do. But our RPI is about to fall into the mid-20s.
Sometimes I hate being right. Maybe we can win a couple in the SECT. Horrible job by Lemonis with that schedule. We should easily be hosting.
Coach34, Homedawg, DownwardDawg, BrunswickDawg and Todd4state all were wrong. They all argued with me vigorously. I've got receipts.
Playing all those Q4 games was not our downfall, losing to them wasQuote:
Originally Posted by Quaoarsking
This.Quote:
Originally Posted by MoreCowbell
If you don't schedule them you don't have to worry about losing them.........
Now Saltydog. You know Lemonis had to schedule soft to try and save his job. No way he thought this team could win 17 SEC games. He was scheduling to get in the Tourney. Who knew the bottom half of the SEC would be so bad, they literally beat up on each other.Quote:
Originally Posted by Saltydog
I say the same thing in hoops. Go on the road and play @Duke @UNC @ UConn etc and if we win 1 it counts way more as beating 10 cupcakes at home.
Great w your receipts. But I've said for weeks we wouldn't host w 17 wins in the league. Thought 18 was possible but not sure. But cool w the rest.Quote:
Originally Posted by HoopsDawg
Yeah, but that was my point preseason. Just a decent non con and we are hosting. It was a scared schedule aimed to save his jobs or stack wins. It was not a schedule built to maximize RPI.Quote:
Originally Posted by Homedawg
We'll be dog shit next year, Lemon will be fired, and we'll start over from scratch like we should have last year with a competent coach. Lemon can't recruit, and we'll start over with a new coach when we should've done it last year.
A Chris Lemonis coached team will never make a run anywhere close to what he did with another man's recruits.
This team will be in and out on the post season faster than a Chick-fil-A drive through. Mark my words.
We won't see full effort again until the Regional. Anybody could beat us next week.
Proven right how? Nobody has yet explained to me how losing more games to a tougher schedule would benefit us????
Losing to teams on this weaker schedule has been the problem. I cant help you if you cannot understand that
We will continue to play SWAC teams- we always have. We do that to help keep their programs afloat.
For the trillionth time, nobody is saying that we should have played really tough teams and lost to them. We just scheduled really weak teams in the sub-200 range that really ranked our RPI. Replace these 5 games (all 275 or worse):Quote:
Originally Posted by Coach34
3 vs. Mt. St. Mary's
1 vs. Alcorn State
1 vs. North Alabama
With teams who are around the 175-200 range, and our RPI is 8-10 spots higher. I just ran the calculation. We'd be safely hosting right now, not praying to make a deep run and then maybe have a shot. We'd still be playing bad teams that we should easily beat (you never know in baseball, but you never know with the 275-300 range either), but our RPI would be much better off. ETA: Even if we'd gone 4-1 against those 5 replacement teams instead of 5-0, we'd be much better off RPI-wise.
We've known for decades (literally) in any sport that playing teams in the high 100s doesn't tank your RPI, while playing teams in the high 200s does, and unless you suck, you shouldn't have a problem beating either, yet in every sport we continue to schedule like idiots.
You can spout all that you want. SEC teams arent going to stop playing a few SWAC games a year. It's a way to get your entire roster playing time. It supports lesser programs with a good paycheck. That's college baseball.
I mean damn- our SOS in 19th best in the country. Acting like we played a 75th type of schedule is ridiculous
I certainly never claimed we have the "75th type of schedule." The numbers are what they are. We could have had an RPI in the mid-teens even at 17-13, even with the losses to Air Force and Austin Peay (RPIs of 110 and 146 by the way), even with the games we blew, if we had just scheduled a little smarter. It's just basic math.Quote:
Originally Posted by Coach34
The RPI formula has existed for years, and those teams have sucked for years. It's not like we were caught off guard in an understandable way.
Lolol, you are still arguing that you were right. We finished 5th in the SEC and we aren't a lock bc our noncon was trash. Just say I was wrong, that was a dumbass schedule.Quote:
Originally Posted by Coach34
And college coaches know about RPI and factor that in when looking at their team as to who they should schedule. Not to mention- sometimes in scheduling you have to get who you can get. Saying we should play La Tech for a weekend preconference and them telling us **** no way is the way the business is. Baseball budgets and such with non-SEC schools limits games they will play as wellQuote:
Originally Posted by Quaoarsking
explain how losing more games to a tougher schedule would help us? You cant do it.Quote:
Originally Posted by HoopsDawg
Do you just not read posts before you reply? NO ONE has said "we should have played a tougher schedule and lost more games."Quote:
Originally Posted by Coach34
The (indisputably correct) argument is that we should have replaced the 275-300 RPI teams on our schedule with 175-200 RPI teams and likely had the same record (or maybe 1 more loss in the worst case scenario) and that alone makes us a host instead of not a host.
Somehow almost every SEC team to ever go 17-13 in the 64-team era has had a good enough RPI to host. Not all of them of course, we failed ourselves in 2014 at 18-12 for this same reason. But acting like these very basic scheduling recommendations with are just too hard to reliably enact is ridiculous. Almost every figures this out every year. Unfortunately Mississippi State in 2024 failed to do that bare minimum, and in 2 weeks we'll be playing on the road as a result.Quote:
Originally Posted by Coach34
Do your receipts say that we had a higher SOS than Tennessee and LSU?Quote:
Originally Posted by HoopsDawg
It's not like we can predict RPI preseason. We could schedule La Tech next year and their RPI might be 100.Quote:
Originally Posted by Coach34
No we aren't a lock because we lost to teams like Central Arkansas. If you beat those teams your RPI doesn't go down nearly as much and that is a fact.Quote:
Originally Posted by HoopsDawg
This is the current RPI number one team. What a murderer's row like Texas Southern!**
https://www.warrennolan.com/baseball...edule/Texas-AM
Exactamundo. You can project what a team has- but knowing how RPI will shape up is a guess.Quote:
Originally Posted by Todd4State
aGAIN I say- take our 2 worst losses off this season and we are easily 10 points higher in RPI. Its not what you scheduled as much as it is who you lost to
It's really dumb to argue against an indisputably mathematically correct statement like "We played too many teams that lowered our RPI, despite the fact that we beat them, and are now suffering the consequences." Mt. St. Mary's, Alcorn State, and North Alabama consistently have RPIs in the 275-300 range, and we've all known for years that playing teams like that lowers your RPI even when you beat them.
Sure, we could have had a better record and gotten into the hosting range despite playing those teams, but even in that case we would be kicking ourselves for being the #12 national seed and playing on the road in the Supers instead of being the #6 or so. The fact remains that we knew we were setting ourselves up to be underseeded when we made the schedule and did it anyway. I don't know why this objectively true statement is facing pushback.
If Alcorn State usually had an RPI in the 150 range and just randomly was worse than 300 this year, I wouldn't blame anyone for scheduling them, and I wouldn't have used them as an example. Like, jeez, give me some credit for basic decency and reasonableness.
Obviously I know that you can't always predict where everyone's RPI is going to end up. But we could and should have predicted that Mt. St. Mary's, Alcorn, and North Alabama were going to be bad enough to hurt our resume even with a win. Huge self-inflicted error on our part.
This team is HOSTING. BOOK IT. There is a segment of p u s s y fans that can’t stand that Lemons is the right coach for this team. Get over it, LOSERS
The only way this team hosts is that we make a deep run in Hoover, enough to get our RPI back into the teens, and then we get lucky and the selection committee takes that into account and lets us host.Quote:
Originally Posted by RockyDog
It's not impossible, but it would be a departure from the way the committee has worked for the last few years.
Our OOC schedule was one of the worst in the country.
If we win a couple in Hoover, sureQuote:
Originally Posted by RockyDog
Todd, you told me 20 times our non conference didn't matter bc conference play will work everything out. Well, you were wrong. That's ok, it happens.Quote:
Originally Posted by Todd4State
This thread is so funny to me. People just can't admit when they are wrong.Quote:
Originally Posted by Cooterpoot
Another fact. If instead of Mt. St. Mary's (who we knew beforehand would likely have an RPI worse than 250, probably closer to 300 and would hurt our resume three times even if we swept), we'd played just one of these teams, we would likely be hosting:
- Arkansas State
- Northwestern State
- Charleston Southern
- Texas A&M Corpus Christi
- UTRGV
This isn't "play a good team and lose to them." This is play a team around 200 in RPI instead of a team around 300 in RPI. Would any of those teams have been willing to play us? Probably. But if all 5 were unavailable, there's about a dozen more we could have reached out to.
We knew that a weekend series against Mt. St. Mary's, in addition to playing several more midweek games against teams of that caliber, would hurt our RPI. No matter where we ended up in our record, it was going to cost us something. Cost us a top 8 seed, cost us a hosting bid (hey that's probably what happened!), cost us a 2 seed, cost us making a Regional at all, something. We were destined to end up a little bit worse than our record would typically get us.
What's the best case scenario now? We make a deep run in Hoover, maybe win it, get our RPI up and the committee makes a late change and lets us host after all. That would be awesome. If that happens, the usual suspects are going to be all like "haha I told you we would end up hosting!!!" and gloat and beat their chest. But actually, my earlier statement still holds. A team that goes 17-13 and wins the SEC Tournament is usually going to get a top 8 national seed, or maybe barely missing it. Instead in that scenario, we'll be like #13 or maybe worse.
So if we do make that run in Hoover, our poorly made schedule still cost us something, it's just a top 8 seed rather than a hosting bid overall. Don't let the usual suspects gloat if that happens.
Are we not in contention to host?Quote:
Originally Posted by HoopsDawg
And no responses to the RPI 1 schedule I gave which included two SWAC teams. I could link others and again- no response will be given because it proves their point wrong.Quote:
Originally Posted by Coach34
If you win your OOC games RPI will not go down much if at all.
When you play teams in the bottom 50 or so it does. Come on, we all know that and have discussed it when it happened this year.Quote:
Originally Posted by Todd4State
I don't understand why you are trying to die on this hill that the schedule wasn't a problem. It was. We should be gaming our schedule every year to maximize RPI, hiring mathematical consultants if necessary. Instead we do the opposite and suffer the consequences.
You really think playing Arkansas State would have made that much of a difference? Seriously? That's what you're going with here? LOL. Their RPI was 211. Northwestern State was RPI 179. It's all quadrant four. Re-arranging deck chairs for the same result.Quote:
Originally Posted by Quaoarsking
When you find that crystal ball to game RPI let Chris Lemonis know. In fact why don't you tell me right now who is going to have a satisfactory RPI and what it will be right now?Quote:
Originally Posted by Quaoarsking
Also explain how come when we played and beat Mizzou our RPI didn't go down Thursday or Friday? That in and of itself proves you wrong right there.
https://www.warrennolan.com/baseball...edule/Arkansas
This is RPI 2- good thing their crystal ball figured out that James Madison would be RPI 44 like we all knew.
And oh look at that- Arkansas Pine Bluff.
RPI 3 Kentucky. Everyone knew South Carolina Upstate would be RPI 87 and Lipscomb who has been a decent team would be RPI 221. Obviously.**
https://www.warrennolan.com/baseball...edule/Kentucky