Another nice thing about this win is that it guarantees at least a .500 season for WG and the Owls. Unless they somehow find themselves in possession of an at-large bid (instead of a conference championship). But they seem to be playing well right now, so get that win tomorrow.

(05-27-2017 03:31 PM)gsloth Wrote:  Another nice thing about this win is that it guarantees at least a .500 season for WG and the Owls. Unless they somehow find themselves in possession of an at-large bid (instead of a conference championship). But they seem to be playing well right now, so get that win tomorrow.

I was just coming here to post this exact thing. And it's not like an at-large bid would be a bad thing, even if it took the guarantee away.

(05-27-2017 03:42 PM)texd Wrote:  

(05-27-2017 03:31 PM)gsloth Wrote:  Another nice thing about this win is that it guarantees at least a .500 season for WG and the Owls. Unless they somehow find themselves in possession of an at-large bid (instead of a conference championship). But they seem to be playing well right now, so get that win tomorrow.

I was just coming here to post this exact thing. And it's not like an at-large bid would be a bad thing, even if it took the guarantee away.

At large bid ain't happening; not with a 6th place finish in the #6 RPI conference. Let's just win the auto bid.

As for our pitching tomorrow, I wouldn't be surprised if The OG hands the ball to Canterino to start, hoping to get 3 quality innings and an early lead before going to All Staff.

(05-27-2017 04:04 PM)waltgreenberg Wrote:  At large bid ain't happening; not with a 6th place finish in the #6 RPI conference. Let's just win the auto bid.

I think an at large bid is very possible with our strong finish and extremely high SoS. With the high probability of this being Wayne's last season, it wouldn't surprise me if the Committee gave us a tiebreaker for one of the last at large slots.

Of course, we'd prefer to render this entire discussion moot by winning today's game.

(05-28-2017 07:03 AM)Volente Beach Owl Wrote:  

(05-27-2017 04:04 PM)waltgreenberg Wrote:  At large bid ain't happening; not with a 6th place finish in the #6 RPI conference. Let's just win the auto bid.

I think an at large bid is very possible with our strong finish and extremely high SoS. With the high probability of this being Wayne's last season, it wouldn't surprise me if the Committee gave us a tiebreaker for one of the last at large slots.

Of course, we'd prefer to render this entire discussion moot by winning today's game.

As others have pointed out, and both Jeremy Mills and Kendall has confirmed, we do not qualify for an at-large bid as one has to finish ABOVE .500. It's win or bust. Period.

(05-28-2017 07:10 AM)waltgreenberg Wrote:  As others have pointed out, and both Jeremy Mills and Kendall has confirmed, we do not qualify for an at-large bid as one has to finish ABOVE .500. It's win or bust. Period.

Walt, can you point me to a rule that states that you have to be above .500 for an at large bid? I was reading a note from Kendall yesterday that was discussing Rice's chances as a late riser and it made no mention of this +.500 requirement.

(05-28-2017 08:17 AM)Volente Beach Owl Wrote:  

(05-28-2017 07:10 AM)waltgreenberg Wrote:  As others have pointed out, and both Jeremy Mills and Kendall has confirmed, we do not qualify for an at-large bid as one has to finish ABOVE .500. It's win or bust. Period.

Walt, can you point me to a rule that states that you have to be above .500 for an at large bid? I was reading a note from Kendall yesterday that was discussing Rice's chances as a late riser and it made no mention of this +.500 requirement.

BOTH Kendall and Jeremy have tweeted over the past couple days that Rice only qualifies with the auto bid. Jeremy quoted the "rule" in response to a comment I had posted on D1.

Just win, and make all this moot.

(05-28-2017 08:22 AM)waltgreenberg Wrote:  

(05-28-2017 08:17 AM)Volente Beach Owl Wrote:  

(05-28-2017 07:10 AM)waltgreenberg Wrote:  As others have pointed out, and both Jeremy Mills and Kendall has confirmed, we do not qualify for an at-large bid as one has to finish ABOVE .500. It's win or bust. Period.

Walt, can you point me to a rule that states that you have to be above .500 for an at large bid? I was reading a note from Kendall yesterday that was discussing Rice's chances as a late riser and it made no mention of this +.500 requirement.

BOTH Kendall and Jeremy have tweeted over the past couple days that Rice only qualifies with the auto bid. Jeremy quoted the "rule" in response to a comment I had posted on D1.

Here's the rule (emphasis added):

Quote:AT-LARGE SELECTION
The Division I Baseball Committee will follow Bylaw 31.3.3 in selecting at-large participants. To be eligible for selection, a team must have a better than .500 record against Division I competition.

[deletia about calculating RPI]

The committee may consider comparative data of individual teams, including, but not limited to, overall record; Division I record; overall RPI rank; nonconference record and RPI rank; conference regular-season record and conference tournament results; road record and RPI; last 15 games’ record; its record against teams ranked 1-25, 26-50, 51-100, 101-150 and below 150 in the RPI; head-to-head record; common opponents’ record; and input from regional advisory committees.

source: http://www.ncaa.org/sites/default/files/...170308.pdf

We keep looking for a back door, when all we need to do is to kick in the front door.

(05-28-2017 08:37 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  We keep looking for a back door, when all we need to do is to kick in the front door.

A wise owl of limber neck always searches for multiple paths to victory.

Front door is plan A!!!