|
|
Post by nuclearbeaver on Jun 9, 2024 10:58:42 GMT -8
The seeding is biased, the wrong teams do get in, and undeserving teams host. You keep hinting that everything is hunky-dory on those three fronts, and they are not. That said: Kentucky is very deserving of a #2 seed. But Oregon State deserved better than a #15. The Beavs were a top 12 team and deserved a top 12 seed. There is a world of difference between seeds 10-12 and 13-15. The seeding is biased. The wrong teams got seeds 10-12. And undeserving teams (Virginia mostly) host. Most of the rest of what you say is true, but you keep gaslighting us about seeding being hunky-dory. Stop it! Selection process is definitely flawed, but I'm not sure we deserved a higher seed. Too many uneven games. Too many games where our lineup disappears.....see yesterday. I think we were seeded about right. Borderline host/high end #2 That's true of all but like 2 or 3 teams nationally though. It would be nice if there was a factor for margin. |
|
|
|
Post by drunkandstoopidbeav on Jun 9, 2024 11:59:16 GMT -8
Aaagh, the idea that Casey built it from scratch bugs me. Between ‘81 and ‘94 the Beavs had Conference Player Of The Year 7 times and a real good record. They’ve had 8 CPOTYs since. During the Riley years the conference was 2 teams smaller and they didn’t go deep into postseason like they have since 11 years AFTER Casey Arrived. Casey built a great team, but it wasn’t from scratch and it took a decade+ to make it into the CWS. Riley did a lot but Casey built it to what it was. In fairness I wasn't alive for most of Riley's tenure so I'm not able to go off anything more than what I'm told and read. Riley had a fine program but it's just not much of a comparison at the end of the day. Everything has a foundation though, I'm sure there's some old timers that would talk about what came before Riley. Try to remember that during a good chunk of Riley's time only 36 teams qualified for the playoffs. It finally got to 48. The Beavers did not get in till it expanded to 64 teams, and a few of those they barely squeaked in and never would have made it in under the previous field size. |
|
|
|
Post by nuclearbeaver on Jun 9, 2024 12:02:06 GMT -8
Riley did a lot but Casey built it to what it was. In fairness I wasn't alive for most of Riley's tenure so I'm not able to go off anything more than what I'm told and read. Riley had a fine program but it's just not much of a comparison at the end of the day. Everything has a foundation though, I'm sure there's some old timers that would talk about what came before Riley. Try to remember that during a good chunk of Riley's time only 36 teams qualified for the playoffs. It finally got to 48. The Beavers did not get in till it expanded to 64 teams, and a few of those they barely squeaked in and never would have made it in under the previous field size. wasn't the total field of eligible teams also significantly lower during those spans. When I go back and look I usually am looking at w/l and win percentage to judge a coach. Not necessarily did they make the post season. |
|
|
|
Post by rgeorge on Jun 9, 2024 12:21:44 GMT -8
Try to remember that during a good chunk of Riley's time only 36 teams qualified for the playoffs. It finally got to 48. The Beavers did not get in till it expanded to 64 teams, and a few of those they barely squeaked in and never would have made it in under the previous field size. wasn't the total field of eligible teams also significantly lower during those spans. When I go back and look I usually am looking at w/l and win percentage to judge a coach. Not necessarily did they make the post season. To each their own... but, W/L and Win % are also skewed. Different eras, differing rules and equipment, different opponents, on and on. It is all nice for fans to do, but success during their own era compared to any other era can be torn apart on many levels. The point being there is no way to tell how one coach or another would fare in the other's "shoes". Just a quick example... Riley dealt with programs like SC, ASU where they literally had a 70-90+ players for Fall ball. At SC there were (4-5) Fall teams competing and that did not count players that were penciled in and played football. Scholarships and "funds" to keep players went unchecked. If people think OSU is undermanned due to the NIL, the 60's thru ?? were rife with pay to play and hoarding of players. Riley and OSU baseball was very similar to what OSU became under Casey. Riley did not have the advantage of many of the rule changes that happened later on. |
|
cake
Sophomore
Posts: 1,598 
|
Post by cake on Jun 9, 2024 17:06:08 GMT -8
If they do they are stupid. I wrote up a big thing awhile ago but the longest streak since the 50's is either 4 or 5 in a row. Perennial powerhouses will go 2-3 times a decade if they are lucky. I could see this changing with NIL but expecting CWS more than once a decade is pretty delusional. Rational goals are essentially making the post season and hosting a regional. Making the post season is an important step for every program and should be the yearly goal. On good years you host and you have a shot to make it. On really good years you are a national seed and your chances are even better. We are on a 7 year post season streak. The regional we one this year was our 9th ever. We have made the CWS 7 times counting 1952. Anything past making the post season is not only hard but takes some luck. Literally our most successful baseball team ever didn't win their regional. Until this loss Mitch was slightly ahead in career win percentage of PC (although obviously PC built it from scratch more or less). H has 37, 48, 41, 45 (so far) win seasons. Things are pretty good. Plus we haven't even lost yet, bats could wake up and we drop a 20 burger to force game 3. Aaagh, the idea that Casey built it from scratch bugs me. Between ‘81 and ‘94 the Beavs had Conference Player Of The Year 7 times and a real good record. They’ve had 8 CPOTYs since. During the Riley years the conference was 2 teams smaller and they didn’t go deep into postseason like they have since 11 years AFTER Casey Arrived. Casey built a great team, but it wasn’t from scratch and it took a decade+ to make it into the CWS. the Pac was bigger during Jack's time. UP, Portland State, Gonzaga and Eastern Washington. The real disadvantage was rarely playing the California and Arizona teams. But yeah, we were generally decent at least. |
|
|
|
Post by Judge Smails on Jun 9, 2024 17:28:16 GMT -8
Aaagh, the idea that Casey built it from scratch bugs me. Between ‘81 and ‘94 the Beavs had Conference Player Of The Year 7 times and a real good record. They’ve had 8 CPOTYs since. During the Riley years the conference was 2 teams smaller and they didn’t go deep into postseason like they have since 11 years AFTER Casey Arrived. Casey built a great team, but it wasn’t from scratch and it took a decade+ to make it into the CWS. the Pac was bigger during Jack's time. UP, Portland State, Gonzaga and Eastern Washington. The real disadvantage was rarely playing the California and Arizona teams. But yeah, we were generally decent at least. The PAC wasn’t bigger. Just s%#tty before it merged, so we got no invite to the tourney, when we should have. |
|
|
|
Post by wilkyisdashiznit on Jun 9, 2024 17:45:09 GMT -8
the Pac was bigger during Jack's time. UP, Portland State, Gonzaga and Eastern Washington. The real disadvantage was rarely playing the California and Arizona teams. But yeah, we were generally decent at least. The PAC wasn’t bigger. Just s%#tty before it merged, so we got no invite to the tourney, when we should have. Eastern Washington was an affiliate member of the Pac-10 in baseball from 1982-1990. Gonzaga was an affiliate member of the Pac-10 in baseball from 1982-1995. Portland was an affiliate member of the Pac-10 in baseball from 1982-1995. Portland State was an affiliate member of the Pac-10 in baseball from 1982-1998. Eastern Washington discontinued the baseball team after the 1990 season. Gonzaga and Portland were required to join the West Coast Conference in baseball after the 1995 season to maintain membership in other sports and did so. Portland State discontinued baseball after the 1998 season as a part of the reunification of the Pac-10 Conference in baseball. There were more teams in California in the 60s, as well. |
|
cake
Sophomore
Posts: 1,598
|
Post by cake on Jun 9, 2024 17:48:21 GMT -8
the Pac was bigger during Jack's time. UP, Portland State, Gonzaga and Eastern Washington. The real disadvantage was rarely playing the California and Arizona teams. But yeah, we were generally decent at least. The PAC wasn’t bigger. Just s%#tty before it merged, so we got no invite to the tourney, when we should have. seriously? Who was I playing against then? |
|
|
|
Post by wilkyisdashiznit on Jun 9, 2024 17:51:02 GMT -8
The PAC wasn’t bigger. Just s%#tty before it merged, so we got no invite to the tourney, when we should have. seriously? Who was I playing against then? Don't take Judge Smails too seriously. He is still mad at all of the Whos wake him up on Christmas Morning with their singing. |
|
|
|
Post by Judge Smails on Jun 9, 2024 17:54:03 GMT -8
seriously? Who was I playing against then? Don't take Judge Smails too seriously. He is still mad at all of the Whos wake him up on Christmas Morning with their singing. Ok Wilky, explain how the PAC was bigger before it merged. |
|
|
|
Post by wilkyisdashiznit on Jun 9, 2024 17:56:13 GMT -8
Don't take Judge Smails too seriously. He is still mad at all of the Whos wake him up on Christmas Morning with their singing. Ok Wilky, explain how the PAC was bigger before it merged. Lol. Portland State was a member. 10 teams in the Pac-10 in 1998. 9 teams in the Pac-10 in 1999. I am not 100% familiar with the kids' new math, but explain how 10 = 9 or how 10 < 9. |
|
|
|
Post by Judge Smails on Jun 9, 2024 18:00:42 GMT -8
Ok Wilky, explain how the PAC was bigger before it merged. Lol. Portland State was a member. 10 teams in the Pac-10 in 1998. 9 teams in the Pac-10 in 1999. I am not 100% familiar with the kids' new math, but explain how 10 = 9 or how 10 < 9. So 12 > 10? Really? And Jack coached well before that, when the north was garbage. |
|
|
|
Post by Judge Smails on Jun 9, 2024 18:01:27 GMT -8
Lol. Portland State was a member. 10 teams in the Pac-10 in 1998. 9 teams in the Pac-10 in 1999. I am not 100% familiar with the kids' new math, but explain how 10 = 9 or how 10 < 9. So 12 > 10? Really? And Jack coached well before that, when the north was garbage. And PSU was such a powerhouse…..lol |
|
|
|
Post by wilkyisdashiznit on Jun 9, 2024 18:01:58 GMT -8
Lol. Portland State was a member. 10 teams in the Pac-10 in 1998. 9 teams in the Pac-10 in 1999. I am not 100% familiar with the kids' new math, but explain how 10 = 9 or how 10 < 9. So 12 > 10? Really? And Jack coached well before that, when the north was garbage. The North was never garbage. Just some of the fans. There were 13 baseball teams in the Pac-10 from 1982-1990. |
|
|
|
Post by Judge Smails on Jun 9, 2024 18:04:08 GMT -8
So 12 > 10? Really? And Jack coached well before that, when the north was garbage. The North was never garbage. Just some of the fans. There were 13 baseball teams in the Pac-10 from 1982-1990. Yes, Portland, PSU and Gonzaga were powerhouses. Keep reaching Wilky. And the North and South were completely separate, so your statement is BS. |
|
