SWC75
Bored Historian
- Joined
- Aug 26, 2011
- Messages
- 33,864
- Like
- 65,294
There will be no Jim Boeheim Show tomorrow night as we haven't played anybody since the last show and he's done interviews discussing the Covid situation in depth. I confirmed this in a call to the Orange Nation Radio show, which is on the same channel and features Paulie Scibilia, who produces the Boeheim show.
So I asked Paulie and Steve Infante the question I was going to ask JB. Considering the loss of two non-conference games to the ACC's extended schedule and the mess we are in at the moment, isn't it asking too much to also play in a three-games-in-three-nights tournament, the Acc-Big Ten challenge and multiple games against former Big East rivals? I suggested maybe in future schedules we should either skip a tournament or make it one of those 'classics' where they feed us a couple of beatable teams in the Dome so we can play a couple of games in New York and maybe just play one former rival.
The suggestion didn't go over too well. Paulie said that if we backed off on the schedule "People will think that we aren't 'Syracuse' anymore. I suggested maybe we aren't but he wants us to maintain the stance that we are and that we shouldn't be afraid of playing anybody. Steve acknowledged that it was at least a relevant question but he likes the idea of an aggressive schedule because it gives us a better chance at quality wins. He said that we wouldn't even be discussing this if we'd beaten Colgate and at least one of VCU and Georgetown.
But we didn't. Aggressive scheduling also gives us a chance to lose more games and that won't convince anyone that we are still 'Syracuse'. And the ACC may not be looking good right now but that could change by the end of the season. Do we really need to pack the 11 game non-conference schedule with potential 'quality wins' at the risk of a losing record that would prevent us from achieving any of our goals and would make it look as if the problem is slipping further down the ladder? I think the loss of the two non-conference games to the expanded ACC schedule is the game-changer here and forces us to reconsider things.
So I asked Paulie and Steve Infante the question I was going to ask JB. Considering the loss of two non-conference games to the ACC's extended schedule and the mess we are in at the moment, isn't it asking too much to also play in a three-games-in-three-nights tournament, the Acc-Big Ten challenge and multiple games against former Big East rivals? I suggested maybe in future schedules we should either skip a tournament or make it one of those 'classics' where they feed us a couple of beatable teams in the Dome so we can play a couple of games in New York and maybe just play one former rival.
The suggestion didn't go over too well. Paulie said that if we backed off on the schedule "People will think that we aren't 'Syracuse' anymore. I suggested maybe we aren't but he wants us to maintain the stance that we are and that we shouldn't be afraid of playing anybody. Steve acknowledged that it was at least a relevant question but he likes the idea of an aggressive schedule because it gives us a better chance at quality wins. He said that we wouldn't even be discussing this if we'd beaten Colgate and at least one of VCU and Georgetown.
But we didn't. Aggressive scheduling also gives us a chance to lose more games and that won't convince anyone that we are still 'Syracuse'. And the ACC may not be looking good right now but that could change by the end of the season. Do we really need to pack the 11 game non-conference schedule with potential 'quality wins' at the risk of a losing record that would prevent us from achieving any of our goals and would make it look as if the problem is slipping further down the ladder? I think the loss of the two non-conference games to the expanded ACC schedule is the game-changer here and forces us to reconsider things.
