I take it that it is now abundant clear why I hate these guys so much and why Schaly never played Pettorini except when forced? This crap is nothing new, although this probably is a new low, even for them.

How the hell do you throw a rule book and not get tossed, whether you’re right or wrong?

I know somewhere it said the Rose-Hulman was most likely to disappoint, but I know despite going 1-2, every fan is proud of the team because every game was fought till the end.

Here is a recap on what actually happened in the 13th inning, ejections and all:

http://www.tribstar.com/sports/local_story_137234648.html
http://www.tribstar.com/sports/local_story_137233906.html?keyword=topstory
http://www.tribstar.com/sports_columns/local_story_138233655.html

All three very interesting reads…..

Though it is unlikely.

If we had a 64 team field, I would not anticipate having the D-I regional/super regional format, which means we probably would have all 8 team regionals, which I wouldn’t be in favor of. I think if we had no automatic berths, 48 would be just fine and everyone could have a 6 team regional.

I just have a feeling that teams that shouldn’t be there in the first place plus 8 team regionals is going to equal pinball-like scores in the loser’s bracket.

One thing I would say in my favor is if the committee screws up, they’re screwing up as to who is the 48th or 54th best, rather than screwing up in not inviting teams ranked in the top 25.

Now it is set up similar to the NCAA D1 basketball tourney, because we all know some of those teams have no chance to win either, but they won their conference and earned a bid. To say that there should be NO automatic bids at all, then you are placing the all the responsibility of selecting who is “best” from across the country. And how do you compare the West vs. South vs. East vs. Midwest?? It seems there would be a lot more argument then for who deserves to go to the playoffs than there is now. And yes, you may get more of the top teams in, but you may also miss teams that way also.

Dukes, it isn’t the selection committee’s fault in any way. They play the bad hand they’re dealt.
—

Spence, I understand the confusion and let me try and clarify. I think the benefit of the automatic bid, is that if you slip up during the regular season, or lost some games you should have won, it still gives you a chance to make the playoffs (ex-say a young team struggles early on, but by the end of the year they can compete for a national championship–I think they deserve that chance).
—
That’s completely the opposite of what you said before, not that I think there are very many cases of that. If a team is capable of winning a national title by the end of the year, then if there aren’t these ridiculous automatic bids you can…OMG…put them in the tournament! So what you’re saying is if Marietta had beaten Heidelberg they would have been a good enough team to compete for a national championship, but a controversial one-run loss on the other team’s home field is enough to convince you they’re not? (I’m not saying Marietta should have been in, but that seems to best illustrate the logic you’re using).
—
But, the at large bids are given to those who slip up in their conference tournament and those who had an excellent season with tough scheduling (hence, they look at strength of schedule and OWP–an example might be a Whitewater of this year).

SS: Some are, some aren’t. Some get pushed out for ridiculous Pool A teams. Does anyone think Methodist, NC Wesleyan, DePauw, Rhodes, Otterbein, Millsaps, St. Olaf, Tyler, Concordia (probably more I’m not thinking of) aren’t better than teams that are nothing more than filler in this tournament?

—
I think they BOTH should “earn” a chance to play in the playoffs. I, too, wish that UT-Tyler would be in the tournament, as I believe they had earned a bid as well. Truth is, at the end of every year, some teams will be at home that are probably better than some teams in the tournament.
—
SS: This wouldn’t be true if there were no automatic berths, except insofar as human imperfection would dictate that even an honest attempt to place the 54 best teams would be errant at some point. But 53 or 52 or even 50 of 54 would be a lot better than what we have now, where I would say a solid 15 teams in this field have zero chance of winning the tournament and another 10 have very little.

What we will see in Pool B in the next 5 years are these developments.

Salisbury and York PA (2007 Pool B) and the rest of the Capital AC are moving to Pool A, now that they have 7 full members. (I don’t have my notes on when this happens. ?? 2010 ?? )

Ithaca is stuck in upstate New York and there are no other teams adding baseball. The E8 saw Hartwick drop baseball. The E-8 accepted Stevens as a new (5th) member to keep the conference from falling below the official number of 4 full members. There do not seem to be enough teams to make a full 7-team conference.

Piedmont (and the GSAC schools) are rumored to be considering merging/being acquired by the USA South, a Pool A conference.

CSS (St Scholastica) and the Upper Midwest AC are moving towards full membership (Pool A) by 2011 or 2012.

The Landmark Conference is finishing its first year as a new member. They will move from Pool B to Pool A in 2010, and take that Pool B bid with them.

CSU-East Bay is geographically isolated. They have announced their moving to D-II in the 2009-10 season. There goes another Pool B power.

The Northern Athletics Conference takes all 12 members into Pool A next year. That is a Pool A bid and part of an allocation to Pool C for us from Pool B.

That leaves Emory (in the five-member UAA) and Chapman. Chicago doesn’t compete in the UAA and NYU and Carnegie-Mellon don’t have baseball.

That summarizes Pool B. I will look at the Pool B shifts in the off-season.