The most common question (er, complaint or flat-out nasty tweet) we got Sunday evening following the NCAA Softball Selection Show revolved around this: Why did Fresno State get an at-large bid to the NCAA Tournament when San Diego State did not?
Aztecs fans are clamoring to know, and we're ready to explain it. Of course, no one will ever know for sure what goes into the selection committee's way of thinking, but we have some educated guesses. First of all, the snub of San Diego State (and yes, it was a snub) was nothing compared to what the committee did to Minnesota when it decided not to give the Gophers a top 16 national seed. But did SDSU deserve a bid to the Field of 64? That answer is probably yes.
Most likely, the Aztecs and Fresno State were together on the at-large board at the end when the committee was adding its final teams to the field. Let's be clear: While San Diego State probably deserved a bid, it didn't deserve a bid over Fresno State. Now the Aztecs may have deserved a bid over the other teams towards the end of the bubble such as Oregon State and Wisconsin, but the Bulldogs compared favorably to all of those final bubble teams when you look inside the RPI at the actual numbers contained in the final Nitty Gritty report the NCAA uses.
Some SDSU fans are saying the Aztecs' 15-9 record and second-place MW finish meant they should be taken ahead of Fresno State, which finished with a 14-9 league mark. The Bulldogs' record, however, comes with an asterisk because weather cost them a game. Fresno State's final game of its series with Utah State was snowed out, meaning the Bulldogs weren't given a chance to finish second. So there's that.
But here's where the numbers are clearly in the Bulldogs' favor: In a head-to-head series between Fresno State and San Diego State, the Bulldogs won two of three meetings. That series took place in San Diego, which is key. Not only did Fresno State win its series with SDSU for a third straight season, the 'Dogs did it on the road. The committee's decision could have been as simple as that: SDSU lost that series and lost it at home.
When checking the RPI, things are even more clear.
Fresno State finished with a 6-8 record vs. teams in the RPI top 50. SDSU's record vs. top 50 RPI teams was a dismal 3-9.
Against teams ranked 26 thru 50th in the final RPI, Fresno State was 5-2, giving the Bulldogs' the strongest mark in that category among all of the final teams on the bubble. San Diego State was the opposite, going 2-5 vs. teams ranked 26th thru 50th in the RPI.
The Bulldogs won 16 games vs. the RPI top 100, compared to 12 for San Diego State (a difference of four). Fresno State won 26 games vs. the RPI top 150, compared to 21 for SDSU (a difference of five). In non-conference play, the Bulldogs won 20 games, while the Aztecs won 16.
Both Fresno State and San Diego State played strong schedules. Neither played a slew of cupcakes and padded their slates with easy wins. But even in this category, Fresno State fared better. The Bulldogs played just five non-conference games against teams outside the RPI top 150 and went a perfect 5-0. San Diego State, meanwhile, played eight non-conference games vs. teams outside the RPI top 150. The Aztecs went 7-1, losing in Long Beach to a Harvard team that finished 172nd in the RPI.
By virtually every measure, Fresno State ranked higher, except in overall RPI where SDSU finished 42nd and the Bulldogs were 47th. And that says a lot about what an imperfect science the RPI is. The numbers defy logic when the Bulldogs rank higher in almost every category. The selection committee did the right thing by actually delving into the information contained inside the RPI rather than taking an arbitrary number at face value.
Again, while San Diego State most likely deserved one of the final spots in the tournament field, it didn't deserve a bid at the expense of the Bulldogs. Whether it deserved a bid over a team like Oregon State, though, is another story.