- Joined
- Jul 1, 2017
- Messages
- 1,366
The issue has always been that we can't translate that to post-season success.
Which is an absurd claim since we've basically played to our seed in all but about two seasons in Jim Morris' tenure.
The issue has always been that we can't translate that to post-season success.
No, Virginia made it to the championship series in back to back seasons, and they have the best record in all of college baseball in the last decade.
What I did prove is that the best teams by your definition (regular season accomplishments) are the same teams that have success in Omaha, with the exception of Louisville and Miami.
No matter what you take from the facts, it is impossible to hide from the ACC's monumental collapse when it comes to Omaha success.
How does a team's record during a decade translate to a Championship during a down year.
The issue has always been that we can't translate that to post-season success.
Which is an absurd claim since we've basically played to our seed in all but about two seasons in Jim Morris' tenure.
Here is more damning evidence:
EVERY team that Morris lost to between 2009 and 2014 went to the World Series that year.
No, Virginia made it to the championship series in back to back seasons, and they have the best record in all of college baseball in the last decade.
They don't have the best record in all of college baseball. They have the best regular season record as you were careful to say.
What I did prove is that the best teams by your definition (regular season accomplishments) are the same teams that have success in Omaha, with the exception of Louisville and Miami.
No you didn't since Virginia wasn't one of the best teams in 2015! They won almost half of their total number of Omaha games in a season where they clearly weren't one of the best teams.
Without that one season you're entire argument would collapse.
Well, it's not a claim. It's a fact. If we're a 3 seed and we go 1-2, that is certainly "playing to our seed", but it still isn't post-season success.
How does a team's record during a decade translate to a Championship during a down year.
This is where he struggles.
He says that the best teams win in Omaha and then his main example is a program who saw one of their worst teams of that period win the national championship.
It's not really a badge of honor to say "we never win all that much because in most years we weren't supposed to win". Uh, congratulations?
More damning evidence..............
UCLA - Missed tournament in 2014, 2016 and no Omaha since 2013. Worse than UM clearly.
Fresno - Missed tournament in 2010, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017
Coastal - Made Omaha ONCE and won it on a FLUKE.
South Carolina - Lost in regaionals in 2014, 2015, 2017. HAve NOT BEEN TO OMAHA SINCE 2012...........
Vanderbilt - No Omaha since 2015. Won in 2015 and second in 2014. You are right - they are in the midst of 2 down years not 4.
Right, because that was the discussion. I made the claim that the best teams over the decade also had the most wins in Omaha in that decade. Of course you would only use the regular season record to make that claim.
Well, it's not a claim. It's a fact. If we're a 3 seed and we go 1-2, that is certainly "playing to our seed", but it still isn't post-season success.
It's a minor point and I don't particularly care because we didn't advance out of the regional (which is the point). But in that case the number of years playing below seed goes from 2 (2012 and 2014) to 4 (2007, 2012-14).
Once again your numbers hurt your argument.