I was going to write an article comparing my last projections to the actual field, but what's the point of comparing my well thought out projections to something the NCAA threw together like a child doing his first paper mache project in elementary school? Here's everything the NCAA selection committee got wrong about the 2015 Baseball Tournament:
1) Southeastern Louisiana
Southeastern Louisiana did everything right. The Lions went 42-17 overall, 25-5 in the Southland conference, and only lost one series all year, to Utah in early April. Here's the thing, their numbers weren't terrible. Their RPI was 52 yet they still got shut out of the field of 64 tournament. Their downfall was that they went 1-2 in the Southland conference tournament, and they missed the tournament because of it. I understand the winner of the tournament is the automatic qualifier, but SLU boat raced the Southland all year long. The committee tries to make it understood that a team is selected by their body of work, but I think they just got lazy with it and "screw it, what's their SOS?". What happened to the Lions is a travesty, but the NCAA's work isn't done there
Nevada has a 225 SOS and failed to win their conference tournament. Nevada also went 41-15 and posted an RPI of 55. I've written about the Wolfpack and their hulkbuster of an offense before, and every word of it rings true. Just like the Lions, the 55 home run swinging Wolpack were not even included in the NCAA's "First Four Out", which is the ultimate slap in the face.
3) Ole Miss
Here's what really pissed me off about SLU and Nevada: not only did Ole Miss get in, they got in as a two seed. The Rebels did have the #1 SOS and 31 RPI, but they posted a sad 30-26 record. 30-26 is good enough to qualify as a 2 seed. Got it. I understand the whole "Ole Miss' SOS was #1 Adam! That's really hard!" but it doesn't do a damn thing for me if you don't actually win the games. But the kicker is the Rebels are a two seed. I'd completely understand if they made the tournament as one of the last three seeds, but a two seed? That tells me that the committee just decided to look at the final number and took a giant shit on the actual body of works the teams produced.
AND THEN THEY COMPLETELY FLOP ON THAT.
Pick a category and Texas A&M was better than TCU in it. Record, RPI, SOS, Non conference wins, you name it. While it's true that the Aggies' flatspin at the end of the season ended up hurting them (1-3-1 on the weekend going into Hoover, where they went 2-1, just like LSU) they still deserved a spot in the top 8. Yet the Horned Frogs got the national seed over the Aggies. You want to reward a team for having a hard season? Then give A&M that national seed, because they earned it more by playing in the infinitely harder conference.
LSU deserved the #1 overall seed more than UCLA no matter how you slice it, but this is splitting hairs, as long as you get a national seed then you get an opportunity to hose a super regional.
But there's one thing the NCAA did right, and that's the matchups. LSU not only plays host to arch rival in their own regional, but they're paired with Houston who LSU is hungry to get revenge against for spoiling the 2014 Baton Rouge regional. Oh, and Houston is hosting our self-labeled little brothers in ULL and familiar postseason foe Rice, who is also Houston's sworn enemy. And Houston Baptist is there too, so it works geographically. Should Florida win their regional that features Florida teams only, they have a matchup with Florida State. Texas A&M can prove they deserve the national seed over TCU in the Supers. Arkansas-Oklahoma State is a mouthwatering matchup. The opportunity for a USC-UCLA super regional exists. Their methods of picking teams is questionable, but they did an excellent job with the placement of the teams that did get in.