A potential National Seed scenario that concerns me ...

[GoneGolfin]

Fresno was a 4 seed in the Long Beach regional with a record of 37-27. They won that then went on to beat Arizona State in Tempe in the supers.

Correct. Not only was Fresno State a #4 seed in the 2008 Long Beach regional, they would not have made the field of 64 had they not won the WAC Tournament automatic NCAA bid. Despite winning the Rice-less WAC regular season, Fresno State was not in a position to receive an at-large bid with such a poor RPI (#89 ranking). Fresno State was also only 1-1 vs. the RPI Top 25, 1-4 vs. the RPI Top 50, and a paltry 7-13 vs. the RPI Top 100. I think this is the best NCAA cinderella story ever. Fresno State had some great teams in the late 70's, 80's, and 90's. But this is the one that broke through.

Additionally, they did it all without their ace (Tanner Scheppers) whom they lost in late April to injury. Scheppers is now a starting pitcher for the Texas Rangers.

Brian

[GoneGolfin]

Well played, well played.

I for one am not "overly" concerned about a national seed so long as we dont get screwed and are paired up against a top 3 seed for Supers.

i get playing at home for Supers, but whatever, it is what it is and 10th ranked RPI conference is a freaking joke.

Imagine where the Sun Belt would be ranked if not for the Cajuns' spectacular season.

Brian

[Just1More]

There is plenty of redundancy in the selection process ... with RPI being the significant measuring stick that it is. This is but one of the flaws in the process.

That said, I think that a top seeded team coming from a strong conference provides further validation to the committee that awarding that top seed is the right thing to do. If you can win or place high in the strongest conferences (especially ones that historically produce national champions), it is a natural progression to consider that team as one of the top teams in the country. Are there boundary cases where this is not true ... certainly. It is entirely possible (though unlikely) for a conference to have the #1 RPI without a single team in the RPI Top 10 ... or possibly even Top 20. But to use an old adage ... nobody is going to get fired for awarding a national seed to the winner of one of the top conferences in the country.

Brian

I don't (can't) disagree with a thing you said.

Besides the RPI redundancy, it's a lot easier to keep your conference near or on the podium if they're given quadruple the opportunity every single year. The process is not (easily) allowing the potential showcasing of new programs on the rise. I still believe too much redundancy exists in the reward side of the RPI.

Personally, I wish all postseason tournaments limited participation to a set number from each conference and made conference realignment arguments/strategy take on a whole new twist.

I do appreciate your answer, Brian

[Dad04]

Imagine where the Sun Belt would be ranked if not for the Cajuns' spectacular season.

Brian

A disturbing thought. Hopefully this year is an anomoly.

[GoneGolfin]

I don't (can't) disagree with a thing you said.

Besides the RPI redundancy, it's a lot easier to keep your conference near or on the podium if they're given quadruple the opportunity every single year. The process is not (easily) allowing the potential showcasing of new programs on the rise. I still believe too much redundancy exists in the reward side of the RPI.

Personally, I wish all postseason tournaments limited participation to a set number from each conference and made conference realignment arguments/strategy take on a whole new twist.

I do appreciate your answer, Brian

I agree with everything you have stated ... except artificial limits on conference participation in the NCAA Tournament. I would prefer to address the glut of NCAA Tournament qualifiers from the elite conferences by fixing the root cause ... revamp the RPI and selection process. I do not want an arbitrary band-aid. As far as conference tournaments are concerned, I would like to see the Sun Belt adopt the softball tournament format for baseball. Or ... go to six teams and only provide the #1 and #2 seeds a single bye. But in either case, the #1 and #2 seeds are not playing until the semi-final round and are playing less damaging (RPI) competition.

Brian

[castsdan]

I would love to see it happen, but I just don't. I think we will have to go on the road to get to Omaha. They will blame it on the SOS (maybe even our small facility) and fill in the teams they want. If we were #5 or 6 that would be a different story but if we finish even at #8, then I don't think they give it to us. I hope I'm wrong.

Hopefully we get paired with a 7-8 seed that we can handle up on

Facility size is not really a factor anymore. Finish with a top 10 RPI and win at least 4 of the last 6, there's a great chance we get a national seed. Win conference tournament and those chances go up. 2010 Coastal Carolina was a national seed. They had a gaudy record and won conference tournament. Problem is they drew South Carolina in the super regionals.

[J-Town Cajun]

What is the Cajuns non conference RPI? I would think it's pretty good?

[GoneGolfin]

2010 Coastal Carolina was a national seed. They had a gaudy record and won conference tournament. Problem is they drew South Carolina in the super regionals.

Coastal Carolina also had a #2 RPI ranking in 2010 at selection time ... in addition to their 51-7 record ... and a #3 Non-Conference RPI.

Brian

[GoneGolfin]

What is the Cajuns non conference RPI? I would think it's pretty good?

Last week it was #11. But it may take a dip with Alabama getting swept this past weekend and Southern Miss dropping 2/3 to Tulane.

Edit: It actually moved up to #9 (despite Alabama and USM) … on the fuel of taking two from SLU.

Brian

[castsdan]

Coastal Carolina also had a #2 RPI ranking in 2010 at selection time ... in addition to their 51-7 record ... and a #3 Non-Conference RPI.

Brian

RPI formula also changed since then. Back then it was easier for mid-major schools to have a higher RPI. RPI is not the end all be all for seeding teams.

[GoneGolfin]

RPI formula also changed since then. Back then it was easier for mid-major schools to have a higher RPI. RPI is not the end all be all for seeding teams.

Of course the formula has changed. But that is irrelevant. What has remained consistent since 2010 is the increased value the selection committee places on RPI rankings when determining national seeds ... when compared to years prior to 2010. Coastal Carolina was a national seed because of that #2 RPI ranking.

And while this is irrelevant to the above point ... it was not easier for "mid-major" schools to have a higher RPI (before the formula change) than the present (after formula change). The opposite is true.

Brian

[CajunDreDog]

So what teams do we need to win the most, and in what order?
What teams do we need to lose the most, and what order?