Elite Program Status (Germans?)
- Thread starter NWADog
- Start date
Now tied for top 13 all time with 12 appearances. I give Florida #12 because they have the title. I usually count the title as 3 appearances to equal it out. So that would bump South Carolina above us too, maybe a few others who won titles in the old days. Still a solid top 15 program all time.
Nope, have to account for titles. It is what it is, downvote all you want. I bet you really think Florida State is top 3 too, right? They are known for one thing and one thing only - NOT WINNING a title.
If you want to specify the last 10 years or so, you may have a point.
Last edited:
We advanced to at least the Super Regionals 5 consecutive seasons. The football comparison to Super Regionals would be playing in a New Years Six Bowl. That is ELITE
How far back are you going for titles to earn a bump? Florida's one title was 4 years ago, and they haven't made it back the last two full seasons. There was a lot more talk about them going 0-2 and underachieving this year than their title 4 years ago. Arizona last won a title in 2012, and those two are the only programs ahead of us with a title in the last 10 years. Oklahoma State's one title was 1959. Do they get a bump still for that? They also have made it once to OMAHA since the turn of this century (2016). Are they a better program than ours? You have teams like USC with a lot more appearances than us, but none since 2001. Are they considered a better program than ours? I do think recent titles do factor in, but it is not just completely cut and dry as they have a title, so that makes their program better either.
The only team to do that, and the only team to be in three consecutive CWS.
They all count.
Again, if you want to make comparisons based on the last 10 year or 20 year period, specify that and compile the data. I'm just going by all-time numbers.
So the following teams have a better claim of being "Elite" than MSU?
Fresno State
Georgia
Holy Cross
Missouri
Ohio State
Pepperdine
Rice
UCLA
Virginia
Wake Forest
Wichita State
And those are just the ones with one title.
Here's more with two or more titles:
Michigan (2)
California (2)
Minnesota (3)
Is Minnesota, with three titles, a better all-time program than MSU?
Fresno State
Georgia
Holy Cross
Missouri
Ohio State
Pepperdine
Rice
UCLA
Virginia
Wake Forest
Wichita State
And those are just the ones with one title.
Here's more with two or more titles:
Michigan (2)
California (2)
Minnesota (3)
Is Minnesota, with three titles, a better all-time program than MSU?
To me, the most comparable program in a much more visible college sport is Gonzaga in basketball. Multiple Sweet 16s and Elite 8s and two national runner ups.
I and many experts would say Gonzaga is clearly an elite college basketball program. I and many fans and experts would also say Mississippi State is clearly an elite college baseball program in every way but an NC.
Opinions will vary.
I and many experts would say Gonzaga is clearly an elite college basketball program. I and many fans and experts would also say Mississippi State is clearly an elite college baseball program in every way but an NC.
Opinions will vary.
Of course not. Natties aren’t the only thing that counts, but they count for a lot. Nobody in their right mind would put Fresno State or Coastal Carolina above MSU in stature.
But, the following schools are all head and shoulders above us historically.
First number is CWS appearances, second number is national titles.
1. Texas (37 / 6)
2. USC (21 / 12)
3. Arizona State (22 / 5)
4. LSU (18 / 6)
5. Miami (25 / 4)
6. Arizona (18 / 4)
7. Cal State Fullerton (18 / 4)
8. Oklahoma State (20 / 1)
9. Stanford (17 / 2)
10. Florida State (23 / 0)
11. Florida (12 / 1)
12. South Carolina (11 / 2)
You can quibble about how much a CWS appearance is worth vs how much a national title is worth, but all these schools are either way above us in both or practically tied on one while being way above on the other.
All-time, we are somewhere in the tier with the following schools:
North Carolina (11 / 0)
Oregon State (7 / 3)
Michigan (8 / 2)
Clemson (12 / 0)
Oklahoma (10 / 2)
So, it should be pretty easy to see that from an all-time perspective, we could be Top 15 but are definitely not Top 10.
But, the following schools are all head and shoulders above us historically.
First number is CWS appearances, second number is national titles.
1. Texas (37 / 6)
2. USC (21 / 12)
3. Arizona State (22 / 5)
4. LSU (18 / 6)
5. Miami (25 / 4)
6. Arizona (18 / 4)
7. Cal State Fullerton (18 / 4)
8. Oklahoma State (20 / 1)
9. Stanford (17 / 2)
10. Florida State (23 / 0)
11. Florida (12 / 1)
12. South Carolina (11 / 2)
You can quibble about how much a CWS appearance is worth vs how much a national title is worth, but all these schools are either way above us in both or practically tied on one while being way above on the other.
All-time, we are somewhere in the tier with the following schools:
North Carolina (11 / 0)
Oregon State (7 / 3)
Michigan (8 / 2)
Clemson (12 / 0)
Oklahoma (10 / 2)
So, it should be pretty easy to see that from an all-time perspective, we could be Top 15 but are definitely not Top 10.
Last edited:
”Elite” is a subjective term. Does elite mean Top 5 all-time, Top 10 all-time, Top 20 all-time, Top 5 in past 10-20 years, Top 10 in past 10-20 years, etc.?
You could define MSU baseball as elite or not elite by any number of completely subjective criteria. But overall, the scoreboard doesn’t lie. The things that can be counted tell us how good we are over any given window in time vs. everyone else.
Last edited:
I guess maybe you could throw them in that tier with us as well. They have 5 CWS with 2 titles. But they haven’t been what they are over the long haul like all of those other teams have, save for maybe Oregon State.
Last edited:
How bout if we say the modern era of college baseball effective when 48 teams playing in Regionals instead of Districts?
MSU in the decade of the 80’s was great overall but maybe not elite. Definitely on the cusp, but a lot like others who has great teams but couldn’t get to Omaha but twice.
MSU in the decade of the 90’s was very good several years and went to back to back CWS. Still, on the cusp, but not quite elite.
MSU in the decade of the 00’s were decent but mediocre by most standards, yet still managed 1 trip to a Omaha. Also had 3 of the worst seasons in MSU baseball history.
MSU in the decade of the 10’s were outstanding if not elite. 7 SR, 3 trips to Omaha, National Runnerup in 2013.
MSU in the decade of the 20’s- so far-Elite. 1 of the Top 8 teams in the country.
Does that suit your fancy better Russ?
MSU in the decade of the 80’s was great overall but maybe not elite. Definitely on the cusp, but a lot like others who has great teams but couldn’t get to Omaha but twice.
MSU in the decade of the 90’s was very good several years and went to back to back CWS. Still, on the cusp, but not quite elite.
MSU in the decade of the 00’s were decent but mediocre by most standards, yet still managed 1 trip to a Omaha. Also had 3 of the worst seasons in MSU baseball history.
MSU in the decade of the 10’s were outstanding if not elite. 7 SR, 3 trips to Omaha, National Runnerup in 2013.
MSU in the decade of the 20’s- so far-Elite. 1 of the Top 8 teams in the country.
Does that suit your fancy better Russ?
Is dementia setting in with me? Cohen ‘13, Henderson ‘18, Lemonis ‘19 and ‘21. Is this right?
Nope, you’re right. 4 different coaches took us to Super Regionals, but only 3 in the past 8 years took us to Omaha.
Is the argument about all-time success or which program is currently better/elite? If it’s the latter then we’re currently a better program than USC. Although, USC has most titles all-time, they haven’t been to the CWS in 20 years and have only reached the postseason 3 times since 2001, that program is in a bad state. I’d say 90% of the best coaches in the country would choose the MSU job over USC if they were both open tomorrow. But hands down, USC has better history than MSU.
I agree that elite is a subjective designation. So, I'll give my definition of it. At this moment in time I would not trade the current state of our program for any of the programs on your earlier list of the historically elite programs (much appreciated btw).
None of the Top 10 programs historically has won a title in the last 10+ years (edited to correct, Arizona has). Many of those schools haven't been consistently relevant nationally in decades and often the results are the product of one or two great coaches and much less competition.
History is nice, but current fans care much more about where you are now. Ole Miss has some big success in football that is 60 years old now and nobody but them gives a ****.
We are an elite college baseball program and have never been more so than we are right now.
Last edited:
Yep Minnesota has 2 NC trophies but they went 4-27 this year and havent been relevant but once, maybe twice in past 20 years.
Holy Cross? Come on man!
Missouri? Puhlease!
LSU? Haven’t won a NC since 2009..... well okay, I’ll give you those guys.
Holy Cross? Come on man!
Missouri? Puhlease!
LSU? Haven’t won a NC since 2009..... well okay, I’ll give you those guys.
I said 4 in the last 8 seasons. I wasn’t counting the 2020 season since Omaha wasn’t an option. We also had Cannizzaro in there to make it 4 coaches. So my initial post is technically correct. I guess I could’ve written my message out more clearly and not meaning that 4 separate coaches went to Omaha. Just meant that we had been to Omaha 4 times in 8 full seasons and in that span we have had 4 different coaches.
Last edited:
17 that all time crap! Is been almost 40 years since Clark/Palmeiro played here. Never go beyond the last 10-20 years. Some of today's LFL students weren't even born 20 years ago.
No, it wasn’t. Cohen, Henderson, and Lemonis (3 coaches) are the only coaches to take us there between 2008 and now. Cannizarro never got us there.
I didn’t say that Cannizzaro took us to Omaha… I said we had 4 coaches in that span of 8 seasons while we took 4 trips to Omaha
Got what you were saying now....didn't mean to sound like an ******* with my reply. Just wasn't following you when I first read.
I figured it wasn’t meant in that way. I didn’t word it well in the first post. Got too excited and didn’t make it clear. All good.
So if the Okalahoma State job and the Mississippi State job were both open, you think the coach would consider a more "elite" program the one that has only made it to Omaha once in over 20 years, and their lone title was in 1954 instead of the team that has made 3 consecutive trips, a great fan base, and top notch facilities, but less overall trips, and no title? Makes perfect sense. This is a situation where the raw numbers don't tell the whole story. Just because they have been to Omaha more doesn't make them more elite. 40% of their appearances were the 50's and 60's. There is a reason that the expression "lies, damned lies, and statistics" exists. In 1986, the average starting annual salary of geography graduates from the University of North Carolina was $250,000.00 That's because one of those grads was Michael Jordan, not because the geography program is amazing. You have to look past the totals and look at the numbers that make up those totals. Labeling a program as Elite is based on where the programs are now and recent history. This is why most of CFB do not consider Notre Dame to be Elite. Their greatest in college football was all from the past. They have not shown themselves to be elite in recent history. Clemson does not have the history of Notre Dame, Michigan, Southern Cal, etc, but everybody would consider them the more elite program right now in College Football.
I’m not the one throwing out elite / non-elite terminology, so take that **** somewhere else. And I love where our program is at right now, but that doesn’t mean we don’t need to win a natty at some point to cement ourselves. It also doesn’t mean there aren’t also a bunch of other outstanding programs out there both in recent history and over the long term.
You take Oklahoma State off the list, you still have 11 teams that are objectively better historically in terms of the big accomplishments. Take USC off the list too (just one NCAA tourney appearance since 2005), still at least 10 teams better. That’s not even to mention programs like Oregon State (3 natties in past 15 years) or Vanderbilt (2 natties in the past 6 years) who are not on that list.
Last edited:
How about 17 you instead? To sit here and act like what happened 40 years ago didn't help build what we have to day is idiotic and something I've come to expect from you. Programs aren't built overnight. Ole Miss was built over the past 20 years and you see their results. Vanderbilt was as well, and you see their results. So what's the difference, how do you define 'building'? Is it the fanbase? Facilities? Trophies?
I'll say this. 20 years is a good metric to see your programs current relevance. That goes for all sports. If you don't have a title in the past 20 years, you're not truly an elite program at the present. Which I'm sure you'd agree with. So, you see, you actually have to DEFINE these things.
Latest
-
01
Rivals Football Recruiting
Jeff Lebby’s recruiting pitch is playing out in real time, and top targets are taking notice
-
02
Maroon and White
Mississippi State Keys to Victory against Missouri
-
03
Maroon and White
No. 24 Mississippi State vs. No. 19 Mizzou: How, where and when to watch the Bulldogs
-
04
Maroon and White Football
Mississippi State DL Eddie Kelly Jr. active for the Bulldogs against former team
-
05
Maroon and White Football
Mississippi State vs. Mizzou History