Syracuse and the games Boehiem missed

[CTWarrior]

I was watching the Lehigh-Holy Cross game rather than DePaul-Georgetown, and at halftime they were talking about Syracuse and the fact that someone on the NCAA selection committee said they would take into consideration the fact that Boeheim missed games when evaluating Syracuse.  The guys on the panel then argued about whether the committee should take that into consideration or not, and the argument centered completely around whether or not having Boeheim on the bench makes a difference like a missing player would.

Am I crazy, but the reason he wasn't on the bench was because of sanctions, right?  Why would you even consider giving them a little benefit of a doubt for his absence when it was because it was self-inflicted, not bad luck or an injury or something?  Isn't that the main argument against it?

[copious1218]

I was watching the Lehigh-Holy Cross game rather than DePaul-Georgetown, and at halftime they were talking about Syracuse and the fact that someone on the NCAA selection committee said they would take into consideration that the fact that Boeheim missed games when evaluating Syracuse.  The guys on the panel then argued about whether the committee should take that into consideration or not, and the argument centered completely around whether or not having Boeheim on the bench makes a difference like a missing player would.

Am I crazy, but the reason he wasn't on the bench was because of sanctions, right?  Why would you even consider giving them a little benefit of a doubt for his absence when it was because it was self-inflicted, not bad luck or an injury or something?  Isn't that the main argument against it?

I saw a tweet about this yesterday and thought the exact same thing. 

[Frenns Liquor Depot]

I was watching the Lehigh-Holy Cross game rather than DePaul-Georgetown, and at halftime they were talking about Syracuse and the fact that someone on the NCAA selection committee said they would take into consideration that the fact that Boeheim missed games when evaluating Syracuse.  The guys on the panel then argued about whether the committee should take that into consideration or not, and the argument centered completely around whether or not having Boeheim on the bench makes a difference like a missing player would.

Am I crazy, but the reason he wasn't on the bench was because of sanctions, right?  Why would you even consider giving them a little benefit of a doubt for his absence when it was because it was self-inflicted, not bad luck or an injury or something?  Isn't that the main argument against it?

Does not help dispel his reputation for being a whiner

[MerrittsMustache]

Regardless of who was coaching, Cuse is not a tourney team...but they'll probably get in because they're a big name school.

[CTWarrior]

Regardless of who was coaching, Cuse is not a tourney team...but they'll probably get in because they're a big name school.

According to Lunardi today, they're the first team out, so they are squarely on the bubble.  If they do get in, it probably means they got some benefit of the doubt due to Boeheim missing some games, which to me is ridiculous.

[muwarrior69]

Did you see the video of him wetting his pants?

http://collegespun.com/acc/syracuse/video-did-jim-boeheim-wet-his-pants-during-syracuses-loss-to-pittsburgh

[GooooMarquette]

So Cuse might actually benefit because Boeheim cheated?

Sounds like the NCAA.