The Case Against Syracuse In the NCAA Tournament

The NCAA Tournament is full of winners and losers. In my last article, I detailed about how USC, despite its conference schedule and all that, should have gotten in. In this one, I will discuss how Syracuse should not have gotten in.

A question many of have had is why Syracuse got picked going into the tournament this year. What got them over the top that gave the Selection Committee the ability to put them into the tournament?

A couple of things really. Some of it was thanks to the Orange's ability this season. Other times, it was because other teams fell off and it allowed Syracuse to rise. One of those abilities to get in was its strength of schedule. They were playing in the ACC, which definitely helps you out with the committee, but like what Oklahoma State learned going through the Big-12, you can't just be in a conference that's very strong and expect that the committee will take pity on you. Its strength of schedule was 15th in the country while Oklahoma State was 69th. They had games against Kansas, Buffalo, Iona, and Maryland, which all had different levels that allowed Syracuse an ability to be successful and battle-tested going into the tournament. The Committee apparently saw that as good enough to be one of the teams.

Another big factor was their ability to win away from home. They were 4-6 away from the Dome, including 4-6 in big road games with two wins over Miami and Louisville. Those were two teams that the Committee saw as Syracuse needing to win in order to get in. To me, Miami was the only elite program that Syracuse won against, but to be fair, Syracuse did better on the road than in previous years. The problem with this is USC had a better road record than Syracuse this season. Even Notre Dame was better than Syracuse away from home.

Iona and Texas Southern were considered bubble teams that Syracuse had to go up against. It wasn't just them, though. They were 6-9 against the field, including wins that actually helped them like the two I just mentioned. Both of those teams ended up with a conference title, and the Orange were given a boost because of that.

Those were the three main factors that allowed Syracuse to get over the top. Unfortunately, they should still not be in, and it's not because I don't agree with why the Committee picked them, but it's because their road record was not as great as other teams who ended up staying out. They didn't have the big wins they needed in order for the Committee to say they're an automatic in, but many of USC's losses on the road were against power teams that were going to get in no matter what, like Arizona. The two big wins the Committee saw in Miami and Louisville, is not what I would consider as strong for the NCAA Tournament. Especially not Louisville, because Louisville had struggled all season and ended up at the NIT. Syracuse, in my mind, needed to have a better road record in order to get into the tournament, but the Committee took pity on them and put them in anyway.

I don't know if this was because they were kicked out last year, but it's clear to look that way. Either way, I think the Committee did a terrible job of allowing Syracuse to get in. Yes, their schedule looks tough and yes, they've had some good wins, but I feel like other teams, like USC and Notre Dame, should've been the frontrunners ahead of Syracuse.