Talk:2018 NCAA Division I baseball tournament: Difference between revisions
+wpore |
No edit summary |
||
Line 9: | Line 9: | ||
Cheers, 18:43, 3 June 2018 (UTC) |
Cheers, 18:43, 3 June 2018 (UTC) |
||
:I tried that in the past and everyone seemed to hate it although it makes more sense, and can be easily communicated on the CWS bracket which Super Regionals pair up before the names are known. [[Special:Contributions/205.142.232.18|205.142.232.18]] ([[User talk:205.142.232.18|talk]]) 19:06, 6 June 2018 (UTC) |
:I tried that in the past and everyone seemed to hate it although it makes more sense, and can be easily communicated on the CWS bracket which Super Regionals pair up before the names are known. [[Special:Contributions/205.142.232.18|205.142.232.18]] ([[User talk:205.142.232.18|talk]]) 19:06, 6 June 2018 (UTC) |
||
== Separation of conference records == |
|||
If statistics for conference records are kept separately, wouldn't it be useful to remove any w-l numbers when a conference played itself? Maybe a new column to show how a conference does against all other conferences? As it sits, anytime a game happens where a conference plays itself, the win percentage will always slip toward .500 boosting the numbers for weak conferences and dragging the powerhouses down. [[Special:Contributions/205.142.232.18|205.142.232.18]] ([[User talk:205.142.232.18|talk]]) 16:44, 29 June 2018 (UTC) |
Revision as of 16:44, 29 June 2018
Baseball: College Start‑class High‑importance | |||||||||||||
|
Oregon Start‑class Low‑importance | |||||||||||||
|
Wikipedia is not a crystal ball
There was a subsection for a "Clemson Super Regional" with a speculative statement. This is a blatant violation of the policy WP:CBALL. I understand why it's attractive to provide mental "hooks" for SRs without knowing who's going to win them; I can almost, almost, almost accept that naming the section by the national seed is OK when that seed is still favored to win. (But no, not quite. That's still very bad.) What's absolutely not acceptable is speculation that a certain team might just win the next three games (as Clemson would have to do in this case). That's completely unacceptable under WP:CBALL.
I know Super Regionals #1 through 8 are kind of an ugly name for headings but until the sites are determined, they're the best solution I can think of that's consistent with Wikipedia policy. Cheers, 18:43, 3 June 2018 (UTC)
- I tried that in the past and everyone seemed to hate it although it makes more sense, and can be easily communicated on the CWS bracket which Super Regionals pair up before the names are known. 205.142.232.18 (talk) 19:06, 6 June 2018 (UTC)
Separation of conference records
If statistics for conference records are kept separately, wouldn't it be useful to remove any w-l numbers when a conference played itself? Maybe a new column to show how a conference does against all other conferences? As it sits, anytime a game happens where a conference plays itself, the win percentage will always slip toward .500 boosting the numbers for weak conferences and dragging the powerhouses down. 205.142.232.18 (talk) 16:44, 29 June 2018 (UTC)