Reply to thread

Message

[QUOTE="jncuse, post: 2122493, member: 1969"]
I don't remember anything about 1997.  29 of 30 on the matrix had us in,

In 2002 I don't remember us getting jobbed.   We ended the year at 4-9, and back then how you finished your season was a key criteria.

2007  Yes.  We should have been in.

2008 - if we were that close to getting in as has been reported it may have been a bit of a gift, so can't really complain about that one.

2016 - We got a committee that decided to take a massive dump on mid majors that benefited all P5 teams.   The committee viewed us more favourably than the public.

2017 - It could have went either way.   The matrix had us at 20%.    But I am not going to mince my words here.    The problem is some people here cherry pick criteria, blatantly ignore key factors, and claim we had the same resume as last year (which we did not)  and  then scream inconsistency which is absurd.  You could make a valid point that something should not be a factor, but that doesn't mean you should expect the committee to ignore that factor.

So we have one year where the pubic had us in (2007) and one year the public had us out (2016) per the matrix.  I don't really see an agenda.   I do see one blatant  - that was 2007.
[/QUOTE]

Verification

What is a Syracuse fan's favorite color?