Reply to thread

Message: [QUOTE="suloyalfan, post: 1702057, member: 397"] A couple things. First, ask Michigan State how "easy" that first game was against MTSU. Yes, they may have been drained after the win against Michigan State, but Syracuse just played on Friday too so it's not like they were fresh either. I'm glad that SU wasn't facing Michigan State, but I'm not sure that it's fair (or intelligent) for anyone to say any #10 seed (Syracuse) has an "easy" game in the tournament especially after arguing that said #10 seed wasn't good enough to be in the tournament in the first place. Next when SU beats Gonzaga, he'll say that Syracuse had another "easy" game against the #11 seed and that's why they won again. Sheer stupidity. Also, I know this may not be related to your post directly, but I think it's relevant to the double standard of selections and perceptions. If you compare Wisconsin (another Sweet 16 team now) and Syracuse tournament resumes they are very close but nobody seemed to have a problem with them getting a #7 seed. I understand that they beat Syracuse head to head on the road. And it's funny because that game ultimately ended up being the difference in their records (19-13 vs 20-12). But Wisconsin also had arguably worse losses than Syracuse (see Gottlieb's "Anyone who lost to St. John's this year shouldn't be in the tournament" baloney): Syracuse (19-13) - 1 sub-200 loss (#224 St. John's - next worst loss #58 Georgetown), 9 top 100 wins, 6 top 50 wins, 6-11 vs top 50 Wisconsin (20-12) - 1 sub-200 loss (#233 W. Illinois), 1 sub-100 loss (#120 UW-Milwaukee), 10 top 100 wins, 7 top 50 wins, 7-6 vs top 50 Lastly, I think that the argument about including Syracuse actually just comes down to if SU wasn't included in the field, who should have been added in their place. I think the only team that had a case for a "better" resume than Syracuse and didn't get in was South Carolina. I could see their argument ONLY because they had a better record vs. Top 50 (4-1 vs. 6-11). But they also played a much easier schedule, which resulted in less opportunities for losses. They are in a power conference but only played 5 games against Top 50 opponents. Syracuse played 17 games against Top 50 opponents! Anyway, see below for the contenders all of the talking heads were discussing after selection Sunday: [COLOR=#000000]Florida (19-14) - 0 sub-200 losses, 12 top 100 wins, 2 top 50 wins, 2-11 vs. top 50, best win #5 West Virginia Georgia (19-13) - 0 sub-200 losses, 2 sub-100 losses (#169 Auburn, #108 Chattanooga), 12 top 100 wins, 5 top 50 wins (#50 South Carolina 3 times), 5-8 vs top 50, best win #48 Clemson Monmouth (27-7) - 3 sub-200 losses (#237 Manhattan, #218 Canisius, #207 Army), 4 top 100 wins, 2 top 50 wins, best win Notre Dame (Syracuse also beat Notre Dame) St. Bonaventure (22-8) - LOST against Syracuse head to head, 1 sub-200 loss (#248 La Salle), 7 top 100 wins, 3 top 50 wins (#47 St. Joe's 3 times), 3-3 vs top 50 St. Mary's (27-5) - 0 sub-200 losses, 4 top 100 wins, 3 top 50 wins (#23 Gonzaga twice), 3-3 vs top 50 San Diego State (25-9) - 1 sub-200 loss (#281 San Diego), 2 top 100 wins, 1 top 50 win, 1-4 vs top 50[/COLOR] South Carolina (24-8) - 0 sub-200 losses, 1 sub-100 loss (#148 Missouri), 12 top 100 wins, 4 top 50 wi[COLOR=#000000]ns, 4-1 vs top 50, best win #16 Texas A&M (Syracuse also beat Texas A&M)[/COLOR] Valparaiso (26-6) - 0 sub-200 losses, 5 sub-100 losses, 5 top 100 wins, 0 top 50 wins, 0-1 vs top 50. [/QUOTE]

Verification: What is a Syracuse fan's favorite color?