Reply to thread

Message

[QUOTE="orangenirvana, post: 1720061, member: 156"]
I thought they were good enough to get in and could have made a run. But based on the committee's criteria, they didn't win enough out of conference or on the road. Their OOC SOS was abysmal that season and their only good road win was at Marquette in one of their first Big East games.

Still hurts thinking they got snubbed but the committee had their own criteria and SU didn't meet those requirements.

I think it's perfectly fine to say Syracuse should have made it into the Tourney that season because they were a better team than Texas Tech or Stanford or Georgia Tech. But to claim something like "Stanford didn't have the [I]resume[/I] to earn a bid" would have been wrong: they made the Tournament that year because their resume was good enough. Then to use that "resume" statement as some sort of shield to deflect against any threat of having to admit you were wrong about them is shady as hell. If any one of those teams had made a run (they all lost) then I would have gladly admitted I was wrong about them.
[/QUOTE]

Verification

What is a Syracuse fan's favorite color?