SOFTBALL NCAA Tournament
- Thread starter SpaceRaider
- Start date
I noticed that in reading some stories today that Missouri (not in the tuscaloosa regional) finished in last place in the $ec, (6-17), missed the $ec tournament, got an at large bid to the tournament. SMH.
http://www.kansascity.com/sports/college/sec/university-of-missouri/article211074154.html
http://www.kansascity.com/sports/college/sec/university-of-missouri/article211074154.html
I watched the selection show last night until the MT bracket was announced. It appeared that softball is dominated by the $EC and Pac 12 so I don't doubt it could be asserted that Missouri is one of the top 64 teams.
Regardless, you can argue until you are blue in the face as to whether a post-season tournament should be, along with a quest to determine a national champion, a reward for a good season or a compilation of the best teams under the present rules. As a fan of a so-called %$&-major playing in a %$&-conference IMHO it is more important to include a %$&-major who had a good season but didn't qualify under the rules rather than a "power" school who may be one of the top 64 teams but had a so-so season. Neither of these schools would have a reasonable chance to win the national championship so why not reward the school with the better record. (Oh yeah, I forgot: gotta protect those "power" coaches jobs)
Schools chose which conference they are in; no school with a losing overall or conference record deserves a post season "reward" regardless of sport.
On another topic: I haven't seen anything in the Nashville media about MT winning the tournament or their advancement to the region in Tuscaloosa. As I've often thought, if the team on West End doesn't offer the sport it will not be covered. Even sports that all other $EC teams offer (Swimming and Diving, Gymnastics, Wrestling, etc.) are never covered by the mid-state media but who cares, The Commodores won the Bowling National Championship.
Regardless, you can argue until you are blue in the face as to whether a post-season tournament should be, along with a quest to determine a national champion, a reward for a good season or a compilation of the best teams under the present rules. As a fan of a so-called %$&-major playing in a %$&-conference IMHO it is more important to include a %$&-major who had a good season but didn't qualify under the rules rather than a "power" school who may be one of the top 64 teams but had a so-so season. Neither of these schools would have a reasonable chance to win the national championship so why not reward the school with the better record. (Oh yeah, I forgot: gotta protect those "power" coaches jobs)
Schools chose which conference they are in; no school with a losing overall or conference record deserves a post season "reward" regardless of sport.
On another topic: I haven't seen anything in the Nashville media about MT winning the tournament or their advancement to the region in Tuscaloosa. As I've often thought, if the team on West End doesn't offer the sport it will not be covered. Even sports that all other $EC teams offer (Swimming and Diving, Gymnastics, Wrestling, etc.) are never covered by the mid-state media but who cares, The Commodores won the Bowling National Championship.
