Gottlieb raises SU losing #1 seed | Page 3 | Syracusefan.com

Gottlieb raises SU losing #1 seed

according to poppys logic duke's home losses to miami and florida state dont matter cuz they have some great out of conference wins. syracuse's wins against georgetown and marquette dont really matter cause they were at home. our loss to notre dame is huge because theyre gonna finish in the top 4 and we havent beaten a top 4 big east team on the road. and our win at louisville isnt even worth mentioning cuz theyre not in the top 4, even though they were 1 of the hottest teams in the league and would have a decent chance to finish in the top 4 if they beat us. brilliant stuff as always poppy

Sent from my SCH-R720 using Tapatalk
 
LOL at Corduroy for being such a douchenozzle that can't see objectively.

Seriously, have you read the frickin thread? Where I said:

It's still very very likely we get the #1, even if we lose 2 more time in the reg. season, and once in the BET. But I can certainly foresee scenarios where we get the two seed with 3 losses.

For example:
Kentucky is a lock.
Missou beats KU again in reg. season and at least reaches final of Big 12
Duke beats UNC at Cameron and at least reaches final of ACC tourney
OSU/MSU run table

In other words, I think we are clearly in the driver's seat, but one would be foolish to think it's a drop dead lock.

Look punk, I don't reply to your posts for one simple reason. You sicken me and I hope to God I'm never in your presence. Such a Huge fan, who lives 3 hours away and went to his 1st dadgum game a month ago. Jesus christ.


Poppy, with all due respect, if SU wins the remaining four games, they not only lock up #1 in Boston, but they also get the #1 overall. BE Tourney result won't matter. SU and UK will be seeded before the tournaments start if they hold serve for the regular season. You can mark that down.
 
still waiting for poppys first positive post about syracuse. or his first post where hes not arguing against syracuse. or his first post where hes not comparing syracuse unfavorably to other teams. come on dude, youre a cuse fan, say something good about them, i know you can do it. just cause someone says something great about the team doesnt automatically mean you gotta come here with a counter argument.
 
according to poppys logic duke's home losses to miami and florida state dont matter cuz they have some great out of conference wins. syracuse's wins against georgetown and marquette dont really matter cause they were at home. our loss to notre dame is huge because theyre gonna finish in the top 4 and we havent beaten a top 4 big east team on the road. and our win at louisville isnt even worth mentioning cuz theyre not in the top 4, even though they were 1 of the hottest teams in the league and would have a decent chance to finish in the top 4 if they beat us. brilliant stuff as always poppy

Sent from my SCH-R720 using Tapatalk

I will try (TRY) to respond to each sentence above in order
1. Every game "matters", win or loss. (Is that another controversial statement? Losing at home is worse than losing on the road, other variables being equal. Miami does not have great OOC losses. Florida State and Temple, as I have contended, are strong teams. My statement is that great wins, imo, (MSU, KU, UNC) outweigh bad losses. I consider Miami their only "bad" loss. Temple and FSU are 17 and 23 in the RPI at the moment (For comparison, though I'm sure you'll use it against me, ND is 37.)

2. You are correct that the Marquette and G'town wins were at home. It is undeniable that they, along with ND, are 2nd-4th in the current standings. The wins matter, but they speak to the benefit of the doubt (or lackthereof, depending on your perspective) of our schedule. Whereas MU and KU play twice, MSU-OSU play twice, UNC-Duke play twice, we played those three teams once. Once. At home. The committee will undoubtedly ask "what was the best road win?" The answer may (MAY) be a win against the 5th-6th place finisher.

3.The loss to ND isn't huge in and of itself. The implication that we won't have a great road win may (MAY) be an important factor. I'm not saying Louisville is a bad team. They are a very good team. But they aren't good enough to hang one's hat on. P.S. They went to OT with DePaul today. The same DePaul that you created a "LOL" thread about a month ago.

4. Not sure how to properly define "one of the hottest teams". Yes, they had a, I believe, 6-7 win streak. But if your argument is that a win vs. LOU is somehow better than a win over Baylor, Indiana, Wisconsin, etc... I don't really see that. It's simple a very good win. Nothing more, nothing less.

In summary, we are most certainly in the driver's seat for a #1. I never said anything otherwise. If one cannot even contemplate a scenario where we could be surpassed, however, they were born at night. And it was probably 2/17/12.
 
Flame out in the BET and forget about a one seed. Lose one of the remaining regular season games AND flame out? Hello 3 seed.

You're nuts if you truly believe that.

We sweat it out only if we have 4 losses (2 in the regular season and 1 on Thursday in BET). But even then we only fall to a 2 seed.

Cheers,
Neil
 
Poppy, with all due respect, if SU wins the remaining four games, they not only lock up #1 in Boston, but they also get the #1 overall. BE Tourney result won't matter. SU and UK will be seeded before the tournaments start if they hold serve for the regular season. You can mark that down.

Absolutely. That's what I said. I even said we could lose THREE games and still likely be safe.

The OP talked about a scenario where we (IIRC) split with UCONN/LOU and lose in the BET.

If we run the table, there is no doubt in the world we are a lock #1 or #2 overall seed.
 
For whatever reason, right or wrong, I feel like most of what you call "positive" posts are really posts of hatred toward other schools, coaches, officials, commentators, or others. For example, we can't mention the word Kentucky without a stream of invective coming out. To me, this is sheer anger, not positivity.

Re: the specific players/teams, I definitely have my opinions. I love CJ and BT b/c they do their business and don't bitch, showboat or otherwise pretend it's about anything but the name on the front of their jerseys. I think Dion is a tremendous talent with a Nuke Laloosh head. I think Melo is a surefire NBA player but nowhere near ready to be anything but an 8th-9th man on an NBA roster. Scoop and KJO are solid college players. Good enough to help you win most games, but nothing special so I rarely comment on them. They are nowhere near as close to my hear as a Cipolla, Sims, Janulis, or Burgan. I think Southerland is awful, but I've decided to let that ship sail a long time ago. And I think Mookie quit on the team and/or himself. Kill me. I'm very excited about Cooney.

I'm certainly not gonna praise our schedule, b/c I feel it's been sub-par, on average, for years. And I think the Big East, on average, embarrasses itself more often than not (since the late 80s).

I'm not gonna partake in the blame the refs game, or bash the commentator game. I think that's some combination of naive, foolish, and immature. In the long run (when we're not all dead) things regress to the mean. And it ruins my enjoyment of the game; i.e. if we lose its b/c we were robbed, but if we win we need to justify things to feel better. Why not just accept that their are 13 people on the court? Why bother about what Karl Hess, Jim Burr, or Tim Higgins is or isn't doing? (Did you see that no call on Aaron Craft by Ted Valentine tonight? I keed. I keed.)

I most appreciate the threads about the game of CBB itself, and nostalgic/trivia type threads.

I enjoy gambling, so 690 is certainly appreciated. But Congress has really crimped my style and messed with my .com.

I try to watch a wide variety of games, though nowhere near the Marsh level anymore. I appreciate different styles of the game. I am cool with games that are played in the 50s. I like to root for the underdog, but who doesn't. I feel like people view praising other players and teams as tantamount to hating on the Orange. That's simply not true.



still waiting for poppys first positive post about syracuse. or his first post where hes not arguing against syracuse. or his first post where hes not comparing syracuse unfavorably to other teams. come on dude, youre a cuse fan, say something good about them, i know you can do it. just cause someone says something great about the team doesnt automatically mean you gotta come here with a counter argument.
 
I love CJ and BT b/c they do their business and don't bitch, showboat or otherwise pretend it's about anything but the name on the front of their jerseys.

Amen.
 
Its sad really that some SU fans cannot see that we are clearly the #1 overall seed right now and a lock for a 1 seed unless we lose out which we aren't doing.

Its a losers mentality. Guess what SU we are ELITE right effin now and we look to be staying that way in the future! Enjoy it and take pride in our great bball program that rivals all comers TODAY!
 
Can't stomach reading four pages about Gottlieb, just have to say that the pundit biz is more and more about getting attention (which is a big turn off to me), he wants to elicit some rabble from a large fanbase.

But since I decided to post in this thread, I'll add that the only way SU loses a 1 seed is if they finish 2-3. Even 3-3 should seal the deal IMO (and there's no injury/suspension stuff, knock on wood).
 
One thing to remember, our team as far as the committee is concerned, is currently UNDEFEATED. The ND game did not happen.
 
Never really minded Gottlieb. His analysis is usually pretty good. However, he definately has a "thing" for us. He talks about us alot and more often than not, is inflammatory. Some of his points over the years, and this year are dead on, however he doesnt seem to rip into other top teams who have even more weaknesses as much as us.
 
You're nuts if you truly believe that.

We sweat it out only if we have 4 losses (2 in the regular season and 1 on Thursday in BET). But even then we only fall to a 2 seed.

Cheers,
Neil
Ever since the Fine scandal broke, Syracuse has been college basketball's Public Enemy #1. You better believe that the entire college basketball world is sitting on the edge of their chairs just waiting for a mis-step. And, don't for a minute think that this doesn't apply equally to the selection committee. Best way to not have a problem? Don't lose in the regular season and don't flame out in the BET.
 
Ever since the Fine scandal broke, Syracuse has been college basketball's Public Enemy #1. You better believe that the entire college basketball world is sitting on the edge of their chairs just waiting for a mis-step. And, don't for a minute think that this doesn't apply equally to the selection committee. Best way to not have a problem? Don't lose in the regular season and don't flame out in the BET.

Another conspiracy theorist? We certainly do have our share, don't we.

Had the Fine case come close to being anything like the Sandusky thing, I might have passed on this comment. But it wasn't so you can come out from the basement and breathe the free air now. Oxygen is good for the brain.

Cheers,
Neil
 
Ever since the Fine scandal broke, Syracuse has been college basketball's Public Enemy #1. You better believe that the entire college basketball world is sitting on the edge of their chairs just waiting for a mis-step. And, don't for a minute think that this doesn't apply equally to the selection committee. Best way to not have a problem? Don't lose in the regular season and don't flame out in the BET.

The committee has a job to do, and it's not to take out vendettas. Agree that winning out cures all...but if the committee can't keep their decisions to on-court results, they don't deserve to be there. They have reputations, too - I doubt they want to be the ones that gave a team with the #2 RPI a three seed because maybe, possibly something inappropriate might have happened years ago (and maybe, possibly Fine got screwed. )
 
Another conspiracy theorist? We certainly do have our share, don't we.

Had the Fine case come close to being anything like the Sandusky thing, I might have passed on this comment. But it wasn't so you can come out from the basement and breathe the free air now. Oxygen is good for the brain.

Cheers,
Neil
Not a conspiracy at all. Just a widely-held opinion amongst media, other fans, etc. You don't have to engage in a conspiracy to have a very jaundiced opinion of SU.

Tell me this, do you really think that ESPN has a favorable opinion of Syracuse and that that opinion doesn't translate to coverage, columnists' opinion, etc.?
(Bilas & Knight are notable exceptions.)
 
Tell me this, do you really think that ESPN has a favorable opinion of Syracuse and that that opinion doesn't translate to coverage, columnists' opinion, etc.?
(Bilas & Knight are notable exceptions.)

I believe that ESPN (as a whole, barring a few exceptions) has enormous respect for JB as a coach. I think they question the "elite" talent on this team which makes them about 65/35 in terms of what they think about SU's chances for a Final Four run (with about 65% of them thinking we will make it, and the others not) but I don't see ESPN (again, as a whole, barring a few exceptions) not believing that SU has earned a #1 seed for the tourney. And I don't see that changing due to either one more loss in the regular season or a first round loss in the BET as you have presented.

Cheers,
Neil
 
The committee has a job to do, and it's not to take out vendettas. Agree that winning out cures all...but if the committee can't keep their decisions to on-court results, they don't deserve to be there. They have reputations, too - I doubt they want to be the ones that gave a team with the #2 RPI a three seed because maybe, possibly something inappropriate might have happened years ago (and maybe, possibly Fine got screwed. )
Yes, you are off course right. But, in my humble opinion, I regard this point of view as idealistic. I am far more cynical in that I see politics, favors owed and called in, even down-right corruption playing roles in exercises even as unlikely as seeding the NCAA tourney.
 
I believe that ESPN (as a whole, barring a few exceptions) has enormous respect for JB as a coach. I think they question the "elite" talent on this team which makes them about 65/35 in terms of what they think about SU's chances for a Final Four run (with about 65% of them thinking we will make it, and the others not) but I don't see ESPN (again, as a whole, barring a few exceptions) not believing that SU has earned a #1 seed for the tourney. And I don't see that changing due to either one more loss in the regular season or a first round loss in the BET as you have presented.

Cheers,
Neil
In reality, I think our positions aren't that far apart. My only difference is that, from my corporate experience, I can't discount the pressure applied from on high upon those who, in this case, write articles, etc. IMHO, if SU loses, that pressure will be for dropping the seeding in articles foreseeing the NCAA tournament. The resulting flap & furor would get fans' blood flowing and be good for business. An Al Davis cliché: "Just win Baby" and they can't do anything to you.
 
Yes, you are off course right. But, in my humble opinion, I regard this point of view as idealistic. I am far more cynical in that I see politics, favors owed and called in, even down-right corruption playing roles in exercises even as unlikely as seeding the NCAA tourney.

Politics dictate events at times, pretty sure we were left out in 2008 for mostly political reasons. The problem here is someone needs to benefit enough for the various stakeholders to be willing to take heat for giving a two-loss team projected to be a #1 a three seed. The difference between making and not making the tourney is huge; the difference between a#1 and a #3 seed isn't. Nobody is going to be willing to own that decision, especially if Fine is in any way perceived as the justification.

I also think you greatly overestimate the heel role Syracuse has been cast in. In Boston or Hartford, maybe (or the guy that only checks out headlines once a week and sets his opinion accordingly) - but not to people I deal with in Atlanta/LA/Indy/Dallas/Chicago./etc. They want to know what actually happened, but realize that ESPN butchered the story and they currently have no idea what did.
 
Forget about the non-BCS conferences. They are not in play for a #1 seed.

Worry about the ACC (Duke/UNC), Big 10 (OSU/MSU) and Big 12 (Missou/Kansas). That's who we will be compared to.

Of those teams, top-50 OOC RPI wins:

Duke: MSU, Kansas, Michigan, Colorado State
UNC: MSU, Wisconsin, Long Beach State, Texas

Kansas: OSU, G'town, Long Beach State
Mizzou: ND, Cal

OSU: Florida, Duke
MSU: FSU, Gonzaga

SU: Florida

Who cares if they are OOC or not? RPI takes into account the strength of the team that you are playing, not which conference they are in.

Top-50 RPI Records:

Syracuse: 7-1 (0 losses outside Top 50)

Duke: 6-4 (0 losses outside Top 50)
North Carolina: 7-4 (0 losses outside Top 50)

Kentucky: 6-1 (0 losses outside Top 50)

Kansas: 7-4 (1 loss outside Top 50)
Missouri: 8-0 (2 losses outside Top 50, one of which was outside Top 100)

Ohio State: 7-3 (1 loss outside Top 50)
Michigan State: 8-4 (1 loss outside Top 50)
 

Similar threads

Replies
0
Views
570
Replies
0
Views
707
Replies
1
Views
401
Replies
1
Views
605
    • Like
Orangeyes Daily Articles for Wednesday for Basketball
Replies
0
Views
565

Forum statistics

Threads
172,203
Messages
5,003,468
Members
6,023
Latest member
Cuselax2215

Online statistics

Members online
198
Guests online
2,186
Total visitors
2,384


...
Top Bottom