|
|
Post by skyrider on Jun 20, 2018 12:36:21 GMT -8
Is it just me or does the outcome/winner of the college world series seem like a total crap shoot rather than a conclusion/winner based on the best team winning?
Baseball is probably such a great game due in part to the often total uncertainty of what will happen in any particular game.
Look at OSU in that first game-best pitcher probably in college baseball this year gets shelled, team that plays great defense commits 3 errors, 4 hour long game in intense heat, and they lose.
Game 2-probably would have lost if there had not been the long delay due to lightning
strikes.
My point is not that OSU is necessarily the best team here, my point is that so many weird and crazy things happen in baseball games who has a clue who the best team here is.
So I root like crazy for the Beavers but never feel very confident that having a really good season record and being on of the tournament "favorites" means anything at all!
|
|
|
|
Post by OriginalWhizzinator on Jun 20, 2018 12:46:11 GMT -8
There's some real truth to that. The double-elimination format makes it really tough if you lose your first game. And you need to have a lot of good arms to win in Omaha. Some of the best teams all season (like Stanford) aren't even here. Then a team like the Huskies with an RPI of 63 barely makes the field of 64 then winds up making it all the way to the CWS. Our run in 2007 was a perfect example. 6th in the Pac-10, last team in the field of 64, but was dominant once they got to Omaha. Never lost a game. Both us and Florida, who were probably considered co-favorites, have a long way to go to make it out of the losers' bracket and even make it to the finals.
|
|
|
|
Post by Judge Smails on Jun 20, 2018 13:19:04 GMT -8
Is it just me or does the outcome/winner of the college world series seem like a total crap shoot rather than a conclusion/winner based on the best team winning?
Baseball is probably such a great game due in part to the often total uncertainty of what will happen in any particular game.
Look at OSU in that first game-best pitcher probably in college baseball this year gets shelled, team that plays great defense commits 3 errors, 4 hour long game in intense heat, and they lose.
Game 2-probably would have lost if there had not been the long delay due to lightning
strikes.
My point is not that OSU is necessarily the best team here, my point is that so many weird and crazy things happen in baseball games who has a clue who the best team here is.
So I root like crazy for the Beavers but never feel very confident that having a really good season record and being on of the tournament "favorites" means anything at all!
You must of not watched the first game if you think Luke got "shelled" |
|
|
|
Post by OriginalWhizzinator on Jun 20, 2018 13:36:25 GMT -8
Is it just me or does the outcome/winner of the college world series seem like a total crap shoot rather than a conclusion/winner based on the best team winning?
Baseball is probably such a great game due in part to the often total uncertainty of what will happen in any particular game.
Look at OSU in that first game-best pitcher probably in college baseball this year gets shelled, team that plays great defense commits 3 errors, 4 hour long game in intense heat, and they lose.
Game 2-probably would have lost if there had not been the long delay due to lightning
strikes.
My point is not that OSU is necessarily the best team here, my point is that so many weird and crazy things happen in baseball games who has a clue who the best team here is.
So I root like crazy for the Beavers but never feel very confident that having a really good season record and being on of the tournament "favorites" means anything at all!
You must of not watched the first game if you think Luke got "shelled" Lol, yeah. The only thing getting shelled was North Carolina batters by Luke's wild pitches.  |
|
|
|
Post by jimbeav on Jun 20, 2018 14:25:00 GMT -8
It's interesting to listen to Casey's comments leading up to the CWS last year and this year, versus, say 2007. If you watch the 2007 CWS retrospective video, it starts with Casey's comments to the team in the background, and he's all in fiery competitive mode, going on about "We're not here to defend anything, we're here to win the college world series. There are lots of people that doubt we can do that, but they don't know your character, your toughness", etc, etc.
But once you're a favorite, like last year and this year, the tone changes a lot. All I heard from Casey last year is how every team is SO good, and who knows what's going to happen. I'm sure the message to the team is more direct and motivational, but I wonder if Casey's 6 trips to the CWS now has given him some perspective. Personally, I kinda liked the kick ass and take no prisoners approach. =)
|
|
|
|
Post by irimi on Jun 20, 2018 15:52:55 GMT -8
Is it different in the majors? Is it different in NCAA football? Or basketball?
Every coach knows that the regular season means nothing once playoffs begin. But once the playoffs begin, then a lot of factors come into play...depth, injuries, weather, rest, coaching, and probably a few more.
Does the best team win? Depends on how you define "best." Last year, we were the best team, but an unexpected news story tripped us up and we couldn't finish. Were we the best team in 2006? We survived. We persevered. We did what we had to do.
I think that by the time they get to the CWS, they've done a pretty decent job getting the teams that deserve to be there and pretty much any team there can defeat any other team on any given day. So all of the peripherals come into play. Whichever team remains standing has to be able to overcome them all.
|
|
|
|
Post by Henry Skrimshander on Jun 20, 2018 16:52:53 GMT -8
I think PC is a lot smarter now and, having won two, he knows exactly how hard it is and how much luck is involved.
In 2006 UNC had us on the ropes in Game 2, and a defensive misplay by UNC's first baseman helped us win Game 3.
In 2007 a bad play by Darwin with two outs in the ninth (running way out to left field and distracting John Wallace, who dropped what would have been the third out) almost cost us the Game 1 against Fullerton.
Instead we survived, and rolled from there.
|
|
|
|
Post by BeaverG20 on Jun 20, 2018 16:52:53 GMT -8
Yeah. Baseball happens.
|
|
|
|
Post by Henry Skrimshander on Jun 20, 2018 20:15:24 GMT -8
Look at today. Borderline 50/50 ball called fair, two runs. Homer glances off foul pole, two runs. Yet we come back and win.
Sometimes you have to be lucky. Sometimes when you're not, you still win!
|
|
|
|
Post by kersting13 on Jun 20, 2018 23:48:26 GMT -8
Is it different in the majors? Is it different in NCAA football? Or basketball? Every coach knows that the regular season means nothing once playoffs begin. But once the playoffs begin, then a lot of factors come into play...depth, injuries, weather, rest, coaching, and probably a few more. Does the best team win? Depends on how you define "best." Last year, we were the best team, but an unexpected news story tripped us up and we couldn't finish. Were we the best team in 2006? We survived. We persevered. We did what we had to do. I think that by the time they get to the CWS, they've done a pretty decent job getting the teams that deserve to be there and pretty much any team there can defeat any other team on any given day. So all of the peripherals come into play. Whichever team remains standing has to be able to overcome them all. Yes, it is different. Who is the worst seeded team to win the NCAA basketball tourney? Play in the Championship? When was the last time a non "blue blood" team won the NCAA football trophy? Baseball is a different animal. Way more variables than most other sports. Lots of random things can affect games in small sample sizes. SaveSave |
|
|
|
Post by bucktoothvarmit on Jun 21, 2018 4:50:26 GMT -8
It is the timeless "lucky or good" argument. Every team in Omaha is good........May as well be lucky!!
Go Beavs!! |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 21, 2018 7:22:33 GMT -8
Look at today. Borderline 50/50 ball called fair, two runs. Homer glances off foul pole, two runs. Yet we come back and win. Sometimes you have to be lucky. Sometimes when you're not, you still win! Does anybody really think this team is winning "lucky"? not even factoring the Kwan injury (huge), the 115 degree dugout, the umpiring (seems unfavorable but im biased) not even factoring those unlucky things these guys won two games with sheer bat power, ball crushing talent. There's no marginal, winning on breaks, or playing the percentages going on here. That stuff kinda not working until all of a sudden they just get real at the plate. |
|
|
|
Post by irimi on Jun 21, 2018 7:37:07 GMT -8
Is it different in the majors? Is it different in NCAA football? Or basketball? Every coach knows that the regular season means nothing once playoffs begin. But once the playoffs begin, then a lot of factors come into play...depth, injuries, weather, rest, coaching, and probably a few more. Does the best team win? Depends on how you define "best." Last year, we were the best team, but an unexpected news story tripped us up and we couldn't finish. Were we the best team in 2006? We survived. We persevered. We did what we had to do. I think that by the time they get to the CWS, they've done a pretty decent job getting the teams that deserve to be there and pretty much any team there can defeat any other team on any given day. So all of the peripherals come into play. Whichever team remains standing has to be able to overcome them all. Yes, it is different. Who is the worst seeded team to win the NCAA basketball tourney? Play in the Championship? When was the last time a non "blue blood" team won the NCAA football trophy? Baseball is a different animal. Way more variables than most other sports. Lots of random things can affect games in small sample sizes. SaveSaveYes, but in those tournaments, when you get down to the final 8, generally speaking, couldn’t any one of those eight teams be the national champion? Or do you believe that the winner of the basketball tournament is really that much better than all the other teams? I guess what I’m suggesting is that at a certain point, we have teams that are quite capable of winning it all, and at that point, then the variables kick in—coaching, experience, injuries, weather, refs, crowd, etc. And this is true for many sports. The tournament is just a way to test a team’s mettle. |
|
