Reply to thread

Message

[QUOTE="jncuse, post: 1630278, member: 1969"]
I would not count on it.  The committee considers all type of non metric things and usually does not act on them.

I assume you are talking about the Waters article.

1.  Dan Gavitt, the VP in charge of tournaments, is not the chair of the committee.  That is Mike Hollis.   I am not even certain if he is on the committee.
2.  [B]Gavitt said they would consider it -- that is way different than saying they will adjust or account for it.[/B]    It is part of their bylaws to try to consider and evaluate player absences.    So he had to say he would consider it.  They tend to use a bailout "too hard to evaluate an impact, so we focused on the overall results, the overall body of work". 
3.  The most positive things in the Waters article, was Waters interpretations of what Gavitt was saying "this means that..."     Gavitt never actually said it Waters chose to interpret it that way.    Gavitt's direct quotes were all "We will consider" type quotes.

10-8 we do not need to worry about what they think about Boeheim's absence.   We are in anyway.

We could even be in at 9-9 without an allowance for JB, although I think JB could be the tiebreaker.to push us over.
[/QUOTE]

Verification

What is a Syracuse fan's favorite color?