USA/NFCA Softball Poll is Out

[GoneGolfin]

_ Brian is not saying we have to play 30 games with the PAC-10. What he IS saying is that we scheduled several VERY poor teams...who then finished with VERY poor records...and we then paid the price for that.

If I understand correctly, we could have played McNeese 12 times and been better off.

We could have played #231 Jackson State ten times (in place of the two UL tournaments) and easily had a Top 16 RPI (as an example). And again, even taking the five teams in the McNeese State tournament and playing them each two more times (instead of the ten games in the UL Tournaments) would have yielded at minimum a Top 20 RPI ranking. There are plenty of other teams and permutations that would have worked.

Brian

[jumboragncajun]

_ ESPN give Orgeron and UL a little credit / press in this link:

http://espn.go.com/ncaa/blog/_/name/...ghth-no-hitter _

They short-changed us 9 wins though!!

[CajunRed]

Note for next year: don't start the season with two sucky tournaments!


igeaux.mobi

[CajunAmos]

We could have played #231 Jackson State ten times (in place of the two UL tournaments) and easily had a Top 16 RPI (as an example). And again, even taking the five teams in the McNeese State tournament and playing them each two more times (instead of the ten games in the UL Tournaments) would have yielded at minimum a Top 20 RPI ranking. There are plenty of other teams and permutations that would have worked.

Brian

Here's a question. Do you know if coaches have access to a person like you who follows the RPI concerns while trying to complete schedules? I know schedules are done in advance (in some cases years) for some sports, but I wasn't sure about softball. I know I've heard Mke say its tough to get high profile teams to come to Lafayette for the season, but it would be nice to have a resource that would allow us to put together a list of teams we could approach a year or two in advance.

[CajunT]

_ We could have played #231 Jackson State ten times (in place of the two UL tournaments) and easily had a Top 16 RPI (as an example). And again, even taking the five teams in the McNeese State tournament and playing them each two more times (instead of the ten games in the UL Tournaments) would have yielded at minimum a Top 20 RPI ranking. There are plenty of other teams and permutations that would have worked.

Brian _

Your arguement is sound. But you can not exclude the fact that the Cajuns had an #23 RPI last season and it didn't help them any more then this year. In fact, one can argue the Cajuns have had a history of being under seated for some time now. So while the scheduling is part of it, there is another side of the equation that you just can not fix with schedule adjustments. The only thing UL can do from their side is adjust the schedule, but do not expect the outcome in seating to any different unless they fall in the top 10.

[CajunRed]

I was going to make this point. Well done.

Your arguement is sound. But you can not exclude the fact that the Cajuns had an #23 RPI last season and it didn't help them any more then this year. In fact, one can argue the Cajuns have had a history of being under seated for some time now. So while the scheduling is part of it, there is another side of the equation that you just can not fix with schedule adjustments. The only thing UL can do from their side is adjust the schedule, but do not expect the outcome in seating to any different unless they fall in the top 10.

igeaux.mobi

[GoneGolfin]

Here's a question. Do you know if coaches have access to a person like you who follows the RPI concerns while trying to complete schedules?

I doubt UL has one. If they do, that person does not understand the intricacies of the RPI and they need someone else.

Brian

[Turbine]

_ I doubt UL has one. If they do, that person does not understand the intricacies of the RPI and they need someone else.

Brian _

I nominate. . .

[GoneGolfin]

_ Your arguement is sound. But you can not exclude the fact that the Cajuns had an #23 RPI last season and it didn't help them any more then this year. In fact, one can argue the Cajuns have had a history of being under seated for some time now. So while the scheduling is part of it, there is another side of the equation that you just can not fix with schedule adjustments. The only thing UL can do from their side is adjust the schedule,

#1 If the Cajuns do not establish themselves with a #1 seed caliber RPI (which they have not done in recent years), they will not be a #1 seed. I think it is quite unlikely that the Cajuns will host without being a #1 seed in the present day. The right geographical situation would need to present itself for the Cajuns to host as a #2 seed.

#2 When the Cajuns are not a #1 seed, because of the competition in their region, they very much run the risk of being a #3 seed with an RPI in the top 32. Geography then comes into play and two very similar high RPI teams can be slotted as the #2/#3 seeds in a regional. When this happens, there is sometimes not much separation between the #1/#2/#3 in order to provide more balance to the regional. This happened in 2010 (Baton Rouge) and in 2009 (Baylor). 2011 ... well, the Cajuns have the RPI of a #3 seed.

#3 This does not happen to just UL.

Hence, after the #1 seeds have been identified, it is more about geography in softball. More than in baseball.

but do not expect the outcome in seating to any different unless they fall in the top 10. _

You have absolutely no evidence on which to base the above assumption.

It is not going to change if we do not schedule smarter. I vote we attempt to schedule smarter, obtain a Top 16 RPI heading into the selection process, and see where we land.

There is a problem, it has been identified, now it must be fixed ... we can leave the excuses about why even fixing the problem might not yield the desired results, to someone else. If the Cajuns fix the problem and nothing changes, then the Cajuns will have something real to complain about. But I think that if the Cajuns have a #1 seed caliber RPI, they will be rewarded with a #1 seed provided the other important criteria fall into place (conference championship, sufficient record vs. RPI Top 25/50, etc.)

Brian

[Turbine]

We could have played #231 Jackson State ten times (in place of the two UL tournaments) and easily had a Top 16 RPI (as an example). And again, even taking the five teams in the McNeese State tournament and playing them each two more times (instead of the ten games in the UL Tournaments) would have yielded at minimum a Top 20 RPI ranking. There are plenty of other teams and permutations that would have worked.

Brian

How long in advance of this season could someone identify Jackson State as a must scedule team?

Is this true every year?



igeaux.mobi