[M T]

I definitely understand your point, but what about geography, which I also refer to. From my perspective, you can consider it from all of the "metric breaks" lining up against us as you said, or perhaps, the simpler explanation: Fresno State, Sac State and UCSB are all very close to PA, and the teams that can bus to Stanford all happen to be particularly strong, perhaps even more so than usual.

What does "numerically" mean in the NCAA Division I Baseball Committee's statement about how teams are assigned to regions?  I think it has to be the measures of quality of the teams, and is present to deal with a situation such as this year.

However, teams may be moved outside their regions, if necessary, to balance the bracket numerically, or if the proximity to an opponent outside the region would be comparable and a better competitive matchup would occur.

Regarding the spreadsheet that shows the disparity of the Massey rankings in the regionals:  Is this just a different view of how the western schools' results are devalued in the RPI?  That is, if someone does the same spreadsheet for RPI, will it look much more balanced?

Another way to balance things out would have been to choose UCSB (RPI #21) as a top 16 seed rather than Ole Miss (RPI #22).  (Of course, I would point out that the top-16 are supposed to be chosen only on their ranking, not by region of country or how it balances the regionals.  If anyone on the committee says otherwise and that's why they chose a SEC school, then they need to re-read their own documents.)   Of course, Ole Miss would have the weight of the Baseball Committee chair from the SEC, while there is no one from the WAC in the Baseball Committee to push its case forward.  (Does the a conference get extra money from a member school hosting regionals, perhaps from TV rights?)

[M T]

I definitely understand your point, but what about geography, which I also refer to. From my perspective, you can consider it from all of the "metric breaks" lining up against us as you said, or perhaps, the simpler explanation: Fresno State, Sac State and UCSB are all very close to PA, and the teams that can bus to Stanford all happen to be particularly strong, perhaps even more so than usual.

What does "numerically" mean in the NCAA Division I Baseball Committee's statement about how teams are assigned to regions?  I think it has to be the measures of quality of the teams, and is present to deal with a situation such as this year.

However, teams may be moved outside their regions, if necessary, to balance the bracket numerically, or if the proximity to an opponent outside the region would be comparable and a better competitive matchup would occur.

Regarding the spreadsheet that shows the disparity of the Massey rankings in the regionals:  Is this just a different view of how the western schools' results are devalued in the RPI?  That is, if someone does the same spreadsheet for RPI, will it look much more balanced?

Another way to balance things out would have been to choose UCSB (RPI #21) as a top 16 seed rather than Ole Miss (RPI #22).  (Of course, I would point out that the top-16 are supposed to be chosen only on their ranking, not by region of country or how it balances the regionals.  If anyone on the committee says otherwise and that's why they chose a SEC school, then they need to re-read their own documents.)   Of course, Ole Miss would have the weight of the Baseball Committee chair from the SEC, while there is no one from the WAC in the Baseball Committee to push its case forward.  (Does the a conference get extra money from a member school hosting regionals, perhaps from TV rights?)