This Super Regional is ridiculous

[VObserver]

Brian, if we ended up with say 2 top 25 programs in the conference and another 4 in the top 50, wouldn't the RPI bonuses start to kick in and help more than the few additional losses would hurt?

[GoneGolfin]

Brian, if we ended up with say 2 top 25 programs in the conference and another 4 in the top 50, wouldn't the RPI bonuses start to kick in and help more than the few additional losses would hurt?

Another Top 25 program would certainly help. As for the programs in the Top 50 ... it depends how they got there. If they got there by scheduling strong, but had a record near .500 ... no, they are not going to help and will likely hurt some. As an example, FIU did not help us this year ... they hurt some. Overall, Kentucky did not help either. And again, if everyone in the conference implemented this approach, it would be net bad for the Cajuns ... because you would have a certain number of teams outside the Top 50 that would have their WP suffer even more.

Brian

[jjlouv]

There is no doubt that these girls were on the short end of the stick as far as seeding goes...

I'm thinking that one day soon, one of our tournaments here at Lamson Park could be a VERY attractive draw to top notch programs. Maybe not Judy Garman big, but not far behind it! Would this scenario be as helpful as I think for the program??

[DieHard1280]

My data shows that the two smartest people on this board live in the Austin area. :-)

Idk how you figured it out, but thank you!

[ATXCajun]

It was actually the first year of the new 64 team tournament, and they thought 8 regional's of 8 teams would be a good idea. Arizona didn't think so as referenced by the quote below.

UA coach Larry Ray called UL's seeding "a joke. If they were going to be in this region it should be as a two seed. They're a World Series-caliber type team, and to play them in the second round. … We'd have to play them some time, but I think they've been misplaced."

Coaches know this stuff. Then they vote in polls and rank you #6. Then some random ___ people with the power to decide everything conclude that polls are meaningless and not useful in thier decision-making. .

[GoneGolfin]

I agree, my point is that I made this point last year that it went beyond the scheduling of the Lotiefs. The schedule is something they can address to a certain point, depending on the funds raised to pay teams like Georgia Tech and Northwestern to come to Lafayette.

The point you made last year (2011) was that the program was hindered by funding and prevented the Lotief's from scheduling more top opponents (which I agree with, but was not my concern) ... in response to my point that the schedule was not smart. I responded with the point (my concern) that the schedule (and RPI) could be improved dramatically by scheduling better and more intelligently at the bottom ... resulting in no more spend. IOW, simply cleaning up the schedule ... as well as better managing it during the season ... when teams come calling to add games. This was achieved in spades this season.

The part they have no control over is the bias of the process and that will never change.

I have never stated anything to the contrary. But you improve what you can. That was the goal of the last year in time ... starting in May of 2011.

This year was almost the perfect season for the Cajuns, going undefeated in their out of conference schedule and losing only four games. Despite that accomplishment along with a Top 10 Ranking and a #12 RPI, it garnered them nothing more then a #14 seed. Sadley, that is the reality of their situation.

But it did not need to be nearly perfect. As I pointed out in another post, the Cajuns could have gone 21-3 in Non-Conference action this season and still would have had a NC RPI ranking of #7. 26-4 last year was good for #55 (A 30-0 non-conference record last year would have resulted in a NC RPI ranking outside the Top 25). Thus, you do not need a perfect non-conference to rank very well here. You simply need to schedule smarter where you have control. You only have control over your non-conference schedule.

As far as overall record is concerned, that 21-3 non-conference record would have translated to a 46-7 record this season. The Cajuns were 49-9 at selection time last season. But this season that 46-7 record would still have been good for a #14 RPI ranking. Improvements to the schedule gave the Cajuns the chance to host a regional and be a #1 seed (they just needed to continue to execute on the field) ... and a few more losses would not have mattered as they still would have been in position. There was some room for error here.

So let's not lose sight of where we were last year. We had the goods, but did not have the schedule. I made it clear last season that having a smarter schedule (and explicitly mentioned the teams that did not belong on the schedule), without spending more money, could get us a Top 16 RPI, a #1 seed, and host regional. The wins and the schedule this year got us the required numbers.

As for earning a Top 10 seed or Top 8 seed ... I have written on numerous occasions that such a seeding would be quite difficult because the Cajuns probably would not have the RPI. That comes first. Then if you have the RPI, you need to be competitive in other criteria where the elite conference schools have an inherent advantage. I have always acknowledged that there is bias in the system (both in the RPI and the selection process). Overcoming that and being a national seed will be extremely difficult given the current setup and requires some outside help.

Brian

[J-Town Cajun]

Brian, I sent you a message to your inbox. Thanks in advance for your reply!

[El Sidonio]

Have you been hanging around Hud lately?

I wish!

[LifeTimeCajun]

Brian,
Do u consult with the baseball coaches as well on the rpi, scheduling issue?

[CajunRed]

The point you made last year (2011) was that the program was hindered by funding and prevented the Lotief's from scheduling more top opponents (which I agree with, but was not my concern) ... in response to my point that the schedule was not smart. I responded with the point (my concern) that the schedule (and RPI) could be improved dramatically by scheduling better and more intelligently at the bottom ... resulting in no more spend. IOW, simply cleaning up the schedule ... as well as better managing it during the season ... when teams come calling to add games. This was achieved in spades this season.


I have never stated anything to the contrary. But you improve what you can. That was the goal of the last year in time ... starting in May of 2011.


But it did not need to be nearly perfect. As I pointed out in another post, the Cajuns could have gone 21-3 in Non-Conference action this season and still would have had a NC RPI ranking of #7. 26-4 last year was good for #55 (A 30-0 non-conference record last year would have resulted in a NC RPI ranking outside the Top 25). Thus, you do not need a perfect non-conference to rank very well here. You simply need to schedule smarter where you have control. You only have control over your non-conference schedule.

As far as overall record is concerned, that 21-3 non-conference record would have translated to a 46-7 record this season. The Cajuns were 49-9 at selection time last season. But this season that 46-7 record would still have been good for a #15 RPI ranking. Improvements to the schedule gave the Cajuns the chance to host a regional and be a #1 seed (they just needed to continue to execute on the field) ... and a few more losses would not have mattered as they still would have been in position. There was some room for error here.

So let's not lose sight of where we were last year. We had the goods, but did not have the schedule. I made it clear last season that having a smarter schedule (and explicitly mentioned the teams that did not belong on the schedule), without spending more money, could get us a Top 16 RPI, a #1 seed, and host regional. The wins and the schedule this year got us the required numbers.

As for earning a Top 10 seed or Top 8 seed ... I have written on numerous occasions that such a seeding would be quite difficult because the Cajuns probably would not have the RPI. That comes first. Then if you have the RPI, you need to be competitive in other criteria where the elite conference schools have an inherent advantage. I have always acknowledged that there is bias in the system (both in the RPI and the selection process). Overcoming that and being a national seed will be extremely difficult given the current setup and requires some outside help.

Brian

We had so little room for error. If this year's RPI ranking of 12 got us a 14 spot, a ranking of 15 or 16 probably would not have earned a host spot. They would have orbitrarily moved us down a couple of spots...for some reason or another.

Jmo...but there is reason to believe it.

[GoneGolfin]

We had so little room for error. If this year's RPI ranking of 12 got us a 14 spot, a ranking of 15 or 16 probably would not have earned a host spot. They would have orbitrarily moved us down a couple of spots...for some reason or another.

Jmo...but there is reason to believe it.

I made a mistake counting down the rankings and did not account for the Cajuns falling below themselves ... the Cajuns would have finished #14 ... just ahead of Georgia. But this is immaterial to the seeding.

The committee did not arbitrarily move us down a couple of spots. I fully understand why Missouri was moved ahead of the Cajuns ... I just do not agree with it. You need to look at the teams that would have been vying for those last few #1 seeds. You also need to understand that there was a large gap between the Cajuns and the #16 spot ... and another significant gap with the #18 -> #20 spots.

Looking at the teams and the way the committee made their selections, I think the Cajuns at a #14 RPI rank would have been a #15 seed ... ahead of Washington at #16.

There is a big difference between taking a team that has a Top 16 RPI and not making them a #1 seed and seeding a team a few positions down from their RPI. No way do I think the Cajuns at #14 would have fallen out of the Top 16 seedings. That would have required Washington (substantially weaker RPI ... remember the committee also sees the RPI numbers, not just the rankings) and someone like Florida State to pass them. Florida State being left out made complete sense because they did not have the resume and finished weak.

Brian

[GoneGolfin]

Brian,
Do u consult with the baseball coaches as well on the rpi, scheduling issue?

No. I have made some inquiries into the athletic office. But nothing is in the works.

Brian