Reply to thread

Message

[QUOTE="JeremyCuse, post: 5066629, member: 43"]
Clearly were talking about 2024 but my point was not sure why SU would need to prove you wrong, their clearly the best program of the modern era despite the last decade + being less than optimal.

I also understand we got lost in translation about 3 vs 9 and Cuse vs Army I get that and understand your point there and again that's my bad for not clarifying. That post was about the ridiculous flight rule and how matchups are made via travel costs versus actual seeding in other tournaments.

I am not currently talking about anything having to do with Cuse vs Army as the 3 vs 9 or anything to do with Army at all. My point that I thought I explained a couple of times in the last few posts  was that you noted in you original response that you felt SU was seeded appropriately at 2 or 3 based on their wins to date. I think most would agree with that with the caveat of what happens this weekend clearly being important for seeding.

You then went on to say that if you were asked to evaluate the teams strictly by "eye test". SU would clearly not be in your top 2 or 3 or in Stevens. I noted that was certainly your right but asked you to clarify who would you put in those spots and why because I felt it was odd to say SU was a top 2 or 3 team based on wins but not on the "eye test".  I am simply looking for your explanation/rationale on why you feel that way and who you would put there and why, not sure why that suddenly is something you can't answer when you brought it up yourself.
[/QUOTE]

Verification

What is a Syracuse fan's favorite color?