Reply to thread

Message

[QUOTE="RF2044, post: 1478339, member: 40"]
No, because the transitive property doesn't apply.  But it did make uconn [barf] the national champion despite those 10-12 losses, which is a far more meaningful accomplishment than going 38-1.

In 2012, we went 34-3, but lost in the elite eight.  Louisville--who we beat twice, and had a worse regular season, won the BET and made it the the final four.  By every objective measure, they had a better season than we did.  Rightly so, even though I wouldn't trade the 34-3 or the experience of going 30-1 in the regular season.  I'm not sure why you are introducing the topic of irrelevancy; not a term I used.

And yes, the Giants WERE the better team... on that night.  Unless I'm mistaken, they won the game.  If they played 100 games, the Pats probably win 80 or more.  But that night, for all the marbles, NE lost, and NY won the championship.

It isn't closed minded, it's how single elimination sports work.

We weren't better than uconn [barf] in 2003--they kicked our ass twice, and would have kicked our asses again if we played them in the tourney.  But they lost, and we won out.  Our accomplishment winning the championship trumps them being "better," and nobody today cares about uconn 2003 [or most other teams that don't win the NC], beyond the fan base that has a rooting interest in that team.  In 10 years, nobody will care about the UK team that lost last year; I doubt that many UK fans will look back favorably on last year's team, relative to expectations.
[/QUOTE]

Verification

What is a Syracuse fan's favorite color?