Quote:
Originally Posted by Tigercat
Objective measure? How about "Did this team finish at least in the top 80% of wins in their conference?" College RPI has been broken for years, all major college baseball publications have been saying this for at least a decade. You act like I am the one that is off base here, when everyone I have heard from baseball america and collegiate baseball talk in depth about the brackets agree with me.
As a comparison of methods, they wouldn't be picked in the NCAA basketball tournament, and in that respect the basketball tournament does it correctly. Everyone who follows college basketball selection would agree that a top 35 RPI team with that kind of poor second half of the season resume should not be in the tournament. You do not pick teams for the tournament that gel into sub par teams. And second half of the season should be MORE important in college baseball, because a college baseball team takes longer to gel due to the intricacies of building a pitching staff.
It is just common sense, national college baseball writers understand that. The committee didn't.
|
Are you under the assumption that I am arguing from an RPI standpoint? The RPI is worthless, I've said as much on this very thread, and the RPI has nothing to do with my position on this matter. I posted Oklahoma State's ranking in multiple (good) computer systems earlier on this thread.
You want to reward teams for having good records in bad conferences. I want to look at a team's true strength by all available measure and put the best teams in the tournament.
Rhode Island's ranks in Massey/ISR/Mine are 106/96/127. You want that team in over 38/29/29? Apparently only because they are in an easier conference? That's crazy, man.
Appealing to the fact that someone else shares your opinion is pointless. I want you to point out the teams that belonged in the tournament instead of Oklahoma State. So far you've mentioned Rhode Island and that is simply a bad choice.
For the record, I agree with JiMGa that the tournament is too big. That's the problem.