Everyone who was concerned about our schedule has been proven correct

[Quaoarsking]

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.

[HoopsDawg]

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.

[MoreCowbell]

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.

Playing all those Q4 games was not our downfall, losing to them was

[Todd4State]

Playing all those Q4 games was not our downfall, losing to them was

This.

[Saltydog]

If you don't schedule them you don't have to worry about losing them.........

[CaptainObvious]

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.

[PGHBulldogBG]

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.

[Homedawg]

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.

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.

[HoopsDawg]

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.

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.

[WAH662]

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.

[Bothrops]

We won't see full effort again until the Regional. Anybody could beat us next week.

[Coach34]

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.

[Quaoarsking]

Proven right how? Nobody has yet explained to me how losing more games to a tougher schedule would benefit us????

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):
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.

[Coach34]

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

[Quaoarsking]

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.

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.

[HoopsDawg]

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.

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.

[Coach34]

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.

The RPI formula has existed for years, and those have sucked for years. It's not like we were caught off guard in an understandable way.

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 well

[Coach34]

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.

explain how losing more games to a tougher schedule would help us? You cant do it.

[Quaoarsking]

explain how losing more games to a tougher schedule would help us? You cant do it.

Do you just not read posts before you reply? NO ONE has said "we should have played a tougher schedule and lost more games."

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.

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 well

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.

[Todd4State]

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.

Do your receipts say that we had a higher SOS than Tennessee and LSU?