Talk:College World Series

Merger with NCAA Division I Baseball Championship
I am just wondering what everyone thinks about that. It seems like most of what anyone cares about when it comes to College baseball is the College World Series and I thought the two articles should go together. It is possible I got the templates backwards, but I also checked and saw that Final Four redirects to NCAA Men'sDivision I Basketball Championship, which is perfectly analogous to what I am suggesting. But I'll leave it out there for anyone to debate and consider. DandyDan2007 11:42, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Dandy, I agree, but I don't know who wants to volunteer. Theknightswhosay (talk) 08:43, 25 June 2017 (UTC)

2007 and 2008
I removed special sections on the 2007 and 2008 CWS. Each year's series has its own page and is adequately linked to from this article. This article is about the series in general, not about any particular year's edition. Their inclusion here is an example of WP:Recentism. I figure I should leave a note here lest I be accused by User:Lenerd of vandalism again. Have a nice day.--67.101.103.239 (talk) 05:17, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

University of Southern California and University of South Carolina
Seeing as USC was used to refer to both teams at times, which is dumb, I've changed both to no longer be ambiguous. But if either was USC, it would be Southern California, as they're more well known both in sports and in baseball. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.181.255.57 (talk) 16:23, May 14, 2011‎
 * I am not sure I would agree. South Carolina has been in the finals of the CWS the past three years, winning it twice.  And their other sports teams are competitive, too.  --rogerd (talk) 18:31, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

If the world runs short of commas, they can find plenty to spare in this article!
Seriously, consider the other characters in the punctuation arsenal. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.170.39.72 (talk) 21:07, 22 June 2013 (UTC)

Two WACs - two separate and unique conferences
NCAA.org's own clearly lists two separate and distinctively different WACs which existed in two entirely difference eras. BlueBonnetLeague would do well to reference citations already in existence rather than rewrite an integral portion of the article to suit his own tastes. BlueBonnetLeague does not own the article - his edit is pointless and serves no purpose other than to disrupt the natural flow and stability of the article and to call into question his understanding, or total ignorance thereof, of factual evidence already cited on page 14 of the NCAA CWS Record Book. There were/are two WACs. Adding a list of conference winners is doable, but without blowing-up the existing format and without removing existing citations. Whatever BlueBonnetLeague's motives are here, and I suspect I know what they are, they ARE NOT for the good of the article. Scrooster (talk) 12:57, 26 September 2014 (UTC)


 * WAC in 1991: Air Force, BYU, Colorado, Hawaii, New Mexico, San Diego St., Utah, UTEP, Wyoming + 2 associate members. How in the world is 1992 a different era?  Teams in 1992: Air Force, BYU, Colorado, Fresno St., Hawaii, New Mexico, San Diego St., Utah, UTEP, Wyoming + 4 associate members.  Even if you go back to 1979, they lost two members (Arizona and Arizona St.) and added one (San Diego St.).  That means it's a new conference and a change of eras?  There is no reason to split them up whatsoever.  You seem to be citing a MISTAKE.    This may have been corrected if the current records page mentioned conferences at all.  The first list (of conference records, not the title games) only has the WAC once.  Look at the history of WAC baseball.  It's one conference.   The people who want to split that up seem to have the agenda here.Theknightswhosay (talk) 09:54, 25 June 2017 (UTC)

1949 to 1987 double elimination finals
In the table I fixed rows 1947 and 1948 to show all games of the best-of-three final series.

Evidently the final was double elimination from 1949 to 1987 (and the entire tournament "pure double elimination" from 1950 to 1987, we say). Thus some champions were undefeated, whose last wins were the last games played only because they won. Other champions were once defeated, whose last wins were knockouts --"final games" in the usual sense where that status is known in advance.

Some mark should be used to distinguish the two classes of Champions, or tournaments (Year), or games (Score). Evidently there was not a single extra-inning game during the pure double-elimination timespan, so there is plenty of space and roughly uniform space in column Score from 1949 to 1987. Offhand I suppose I would mark column Score for that reason. Perhaps star (*) = undefeated champion eliminates once-defeated runner-up; the opposite result would have been followed by another game, now in the knockout class.

--P64 (talk) 19:58, 23 March 2015 (UTC)
 * I completely agree with the concept, although I think the mark should be on the name of the champion to identify them as an undefeated champion. That would correspond to the way the NCAA Record Book notates them, if I recall correctly. Billcasey905 (talk) 17:33, 24 March 2015 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on College World Series. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080612171631/http://www.cwsomaha.com/press-releases/ncaa-signs-25-year-agreement-with-college-world-series-of-omaha-2.html to http://www.cwsomaha.com/press-releases/ncaa-signs-25-year-agreement-with-college-world-series-of-omaha-2.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080612194626/http://www.cwsomaha.com/press-releases/ncaa-memorandum-of-understanding-paves-the-way-for-extending-the-road-to-omaha-through-2.html to http://www.cwsomaha.com/press-releases/ncaa-memorandum-of-understanding-paves-the-way-for-extending-the-road-to-omaha-through-2.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 01:22, 22 March 2017 (UTC)

Conference national championships
There are multiple issues with this.

As discussed above, there was only one Western Athletic Conference. It was not reorganized, and there were not two different eras. Two successful baseball programs simply left one conference for another. That doesn't make it a different conference. Someone at the NCAA office simply made a mistake. If you look at the chart of conference records immediately above on the link given, there is only one Western Athletic Conference.

The Big Eight and Big Twelve should not be separate conferences unless the Pac-8 and Pac-10 are separate conferences from the Pac-12. The SEC didn't transform into a different conference when it expanded either. They're all continuations of the existing conference. It seems that someone is trying to minimize the WAC and the Big Twelve by splitting them up into multiple entries.

Also, I can't figure out why some conferences are bolded and others aren't. I've removed it for now. I'm not necessarily against it if someone will tell me (and the reader) why it's there and apply it consistently.
 * The NCAA Record book, which is the source for this table, maintains them in the previous fashion. This is now an unsourced table as the source it references (an authoritative source, in my contention) disagrees with this table, and therefore is not a verifiable entry.  If you have a new source, besides the NCAA record book, then please provide it.  I understand your reasoning and don't even entirely disagree with you, but you are making assertions without sources that contradict an authoritative source.  The burden of proof is on you to disprove the NCAA record book. Billcasey905 (talk) 15:32, 25 June 2017 (UTC)

There are no two different eras for the WAC, it just happened not to have a team in the CWS Finals between 1978 and 2003. Also, we need to be consistent with the Pac-12 and Big 12. If the Pac-8 and Pac-10 count as part of the present-day conference, so does the Big 8 count as part of the Big 12. I don't know what the bold text on the chart was meant to symbolize; but if you add it back, make it clear to the reader what it symbolizes. If it were active conferences, there were errors. Reverting it back just makes it a warring edit and generally shows irrational stubbornness. Talk pages exist for a reason. Theknightswhosay 09:13, 25 June 2017 (UTC)

Although Cal St. Fullerton had won twice before, the 1995 title was the first after joining the Big West. Theknightswhosay 07:57, 26 June 2017 (UTC)

ADDED: No, the foregoing reasoning is incorrect. The Pac-8 and Pac-10 did not disband before becoming the Pac-10 and Pac-12, respectively. The Big Eight legally disbanded before joining with four members of the SWC to create an entirely new conference in the Big 12. The situations are not analogous. João Do Rio 18:01, 30 June 2017 (UTC)


 * I moved the remarks from the College World Series entry to this talk page to facilitate the discussion. I took the user ids and time stamps from the article history page.


 * Big Eight/Big 12 I can not find anything that says the Big Eight legally disbanded before its members joined the Big 12, and there are two references stating that the four SWC members "came" to and "joined", respectively, the Big Eight, which indicates the Big Eight still existed at that time (See the Big 12 Conference entry). However, as João Do Rio stated, the Big 12 makes no claim to the Big Eight records and history. They should remain separate entries. See the notes below the table and references.


 * WAC The separate entries for the WAC at http://fs.ncaa.org/Docs/stats/baseball_cws_RB/2017/1-CWSGeneral.pdf on page 19 is baffling. I can not find anything that indicates two different WAC entities, and can find references showing the WAC has always been a single entity. Also, see notes below table and references. The NCAA document is not necessarily the final word on everything, to wit, showing Arizona with 40 CWS losses on page 14, when it should be 30. The win percentage matches 30 losses, not 40 losses. I agree with Theknightswhosay. The WAC championships probably should be combined in a single entry.


 * Big West Cal St. Fullerton has been a member of the Big West (same conference but previously called the Pacific Coast Athletic Association) continuously since 1974 which includes all four of their baseball championships. However, for baseball only they were in the SCBA (Southern California Baseball Association) for their first two. The http://fs.ncaa.org/Docs/stats/baseball_cws_RB/2017/1-CWSGeneral.pdf on page 19 does show the 2 wins and 2 wins separately for the Big West and for the Big West SCBA for that reason.


 * Pac-12 and PCC-CIBA I see no reason why the Pac-12 was increased by 2 and the PCC-CIBA decreased by 2. The http://fs.ncaa.org/Docs/stats/baseball_cws_RB/2017/1-CWSGeneral.pdf on page 19 shows 17 and 6, not 19 and 4. I changed it back to be in agreement with the ncaa pdf document. California had 2 (1947, 1957) and Southern California had 4 (1948, 1958, 1961, 1963) while in the CIBA.


 * Jay Jor (talk) 19:27, 1 July 2017 (UTC)
 * I concur on all points except the WAC. I also don't understand the reasoning for two entries for the WAC, but there is no other source out there.  The separated conference entries typically represent different charters.  See PCC and PAC-XX.  By contradicting the cited source for the table, we are violating WP:verifiability.  If another source is presented (ESPN?  Omaha.com?), I will withdraw my objection.  I've looked when this came up in the past, and had no success.  While I would agree that it may be more correct to combine them into a single entry, the standard here is WP:Verifiability not truth. Billcasey905 (talk) 19:35, 1 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Okay, but the WAC itself claims to have always been the same entity, references provided. They list baseball national championships as 7. They in no way show a split of 5 and 2. Is that not verification? http://wacsports.com/sports/2016/6/8/NEWS_0608161025.aspx Jay Jor (talk) 20:13, 1 July 2017 (UTC)


 * Another reference that shows that the teams were in the WAC at the time of winning national championships with no differentiation. http://www.baseball-reference.com/bullpen/Western_Athletic_Conference


 * Other Wikipedia entries, Western_Athletic_Conference, 1965 NCAA University Division Baseball Tournament, 1967 NCAA University Division Baseball Tournament, ..., 2008 NCAA Division I Baseball Tournament, all show the champion as being in the WAC with no differentiation. If the NCAA document, with nothing else in agreement with it and with no explanation, takes precedence, why should it take precedence? It makes little difference to me other than to understand it. I have no connection with anyone else involved in this discussion, any of the schools, or conferences involved, and even if I did, it should make no difference.


 * Jay Jor (talk) 21:03, 1 July 2017 (UTC)


 * Because this table (and nearly all the others on this page) cites the NCAA record book and does not appear in any other source I'm aware of. I'd prefer an independent source from a place like ESPN, CBS Sports, or Omaha.com, but haven't been able to find one.


 * I think the NCAA's record books should take precedence over the claims of individual schools and conferences, simply because those entities have an incentive to inflate or claim history from predecessor entities that others do not recognize. For example, the Pac-12 claims the history of the PCC and CIBA, despite no independent organization (that I'm aware of) crediting them that way.  See the history section of http://catalog.e-digitaleditions.com/i/789648-2017-baseball-media-guide for examples.  Better yet, as noted above, are truly independent sources.


 * I also have no connection to any affected school or entity. I simply stand by the previously accepted consensus from the past several years in regards to this table, that it conform to the NCAA record book unless/until an independent source for the table can be found. Billcasey905 (talk) 21:50, 1 July 2017 (UTC)


 * I've really thought about this and intentionally stepped away from it for a day, but http://fs.ncaa.org/Docs/stats/baseball_cws_RB/2017/1-CWSGeneral.pdf itself also lists WAC, and nothing else, by every one of those 7 national championships on pp. 10 & 11. The only differentiation shows up in the WAC having two separate entries in that one list, carried over year to year, with absolutely no indication of what the difference is. To me it would be like insisting that Arizona be shown with 40 losses in anything that uses the lower right list on page 14 of the above NCAA document, nevermind overwhelming proof that 30 losses is correct. I have no agenda to prevent "crazies" from making anything look better or worse, whether it's the "Pac 12 crowd" or some other group. I just went where the evidence led me. But thanks for a reasonable discussion on the issue. Jay Jor (talk) 22:43, 2 July 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on College World Series. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20170505010101/http://www.ncaa.org/wps/ncaa?key=%2Fncaa%2FNCAA%2FAbout+The+NCAA%2FThe+NCAA+Brand%2FTrademarks+and+Logos%2FTrademarks.html to http://www.ncaa.org/wps/ncaa?key=%2Fncaa%2FNCAA%2FAbout%20The%20NCAA%2FThe%20NCAA%20Brand%2FTrademarks%20and%20Logos%2FTrademarks.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 02:05, 20 July 2017 (UTC)