Quote:
Originally Posted by I_Bleed_Orange_Juice
Although you all know it the Big East probably deserved 9 bids. Syracuse's resume stacked up favorably against all the bubble teams.
|
PLEASE, PLEASE, stop it. How does Syracuse's 6-11 record against top 100 teams stack up "FAVOURABLY" against anybody... and stop referencing +200 games.
Quote:
|
Someone said Oregon and SU resume was about equal, I think you are blind. Wait till the Big East has some experience next year we'll have several contenders for the title. Maybe even get 9 bids "Oh the Horror".
|
So your argument against someone arguing that the resume's are equal. is saying that Syracuse and several other Big East teams will be contenders next year. Awesome.
Please tell me how Syracuse's resume was so much better then Oregon's? No doubt Oregon is not a 9 seed, but there conference record is a wash with Syracuse's. 9-9 in the Pac-10 equates to 9-9 in the Big East... so let's bring it to OOC. They lost three road games. Given their raod win over Kansas St it was slightly better. Oregon has just a bit better profile then SU (not much), but your suggestion on blindness is idiotic.
I knew the ACC deserved 4 max. I wonder how Vitales investigation is going with Virginia Tech. Did Doug Gottleib cry himself to sleep tonight?
Quick note:
The Big East wound up with 7 teams in the top 27 and 9 in the top 54.
The pac10 had 4 in the top 29 and 7 out of the top 82.[/quote]
Your an absolute tool. You realize that does nothing to prove that a 9-9 record in one conference vs the other, because we are comparing 16 friggin teams vs 10 teams. A 5th place team in the Pac-10 is like an 8th place team in the Big East.... voila ORegon=Villanova
Sorry mods, but I can't handle so much bias when its not even supported properly.