MiniMoeHawk
Well-Known Member
So you would rather lose to Hampton in the first round of the NCAA? I probably would
Nit better than NCAA
- Thread starter austinhawk
- Start date
So you would rather lose to Hampton in the first round of the NCAA? I probably would
A first round loss to Hampton is better than NIT title.
An NIT title says you are number 69, and while I understand the significance of that number on so many levels, still not as good as a chance to play in one of the greatest tournaments in all of sports regardless of the outcome.
Aside from the financial benefit, there was a reason Fran wanted it to be known Iowa was playing in the big dance and not a play in game. It means so much to a team and a program.
1977Hawkeye
Well-Known Member
This is how I see it. Hey, I've seen some pretty darn good teams lose in the NCAA 1st round. It happens.
Besides, regarding that loss to 15th seeded Hampton.. That means ISU was a 2 seed, so a pretty darn good season that just happen to end on one bad game in the Tournament. Pretty much the same deal for Iowa and NWST.
I'd rather take a terrific regular season and lose early in the NCAA's than have an average season and win a few extra games in the NIT.
expos1994
Well-Known Member
It doesn't mean you're number 69. We all know there are a lot of worse teams in the tournament than the NIT winner. It means you're number 40.
I thought the NIT run was like playing an extended schedule. We played some decent major conference teams and some decent mid-majors. Virginia, Maryland, Baylor... that was good competition and it was entertaining.
I thought the NIT run was like playing an extended schedule. We played some decent major conference teams and some decent mid-majors. Virginia, Maryland, Baylor... that was good competition and it was entertaining.
I think it it does mean you are 69 because you have no opportunity whatsoever to win an NCAA title. And yes the odds of lots of teams in the tournament and winning the whole thing are as likely as winning the power bowl jackpot, but no matter how remote those odds are they are still there to start the tournament.
The odds of winning an NCAA tournament for the number 1 seed in the NIT are 0.
I wonder if you ask any player a 1st round loss in the NCAA or NIT Championship, what they would prefer, I would hazard to guess all of them would take NCAA.
Last edited:
sportstalent
Well-Known Member
It depends on the state of the program, two years ago I would buy that, but not last season or this season. Iowa is good enough right now to not be a one and done in the NCAA tournament, but tonight will tell us that for sure.
1hawkeye1
Well-Known Member
Because a one and done in the NCAA woulda propelled this team to the National Championship this season.
I don't agree with your post about the rankings, here is why. If you think about it, Hampton a 15th seed but isn't the 60th-63th best team in the country right now. They were merely the 60th-63th best team in the tournament. They had a 18-12 record and play in the MEAC. They got into the tournament for winning their conference championship and earning an automatic bid. Just like Albany, a 16th seed, they were 19-14 and played in a crap conference too. They got an automatic bid for winning their conference but they aren't 64-68 best team in the country. This is also why I think automatic bids are B.S.
So knowing what I posted above, a team who doesn't win their conference championship but plays in better conference like the B1G, for example Minnesota, isn't as good or ranked higher than a Hampton or Albany? Wow, that is stupid. Minnesota is better than Hampton and Albany, regardless of your opinion of which team is better based solely on who is in the NCAA tournament vs. the NIT.
blkngldFRO
Well-Known Member
I can tell you that the way I felt last year going into the NIT about the state of the program was better!
With the end of this year it was very anticlimactic. I was pumped going into watch the NIT game. No the NIT is not greater the the NCAA, but there was excitement. It does not seem like there is much excitement heading into tonight’s game. That is due to a lot of issues not just how the season ended.
With the end of this year it was very anticlimactic. I was pumped going into watch the NIT game. No the NIT is not greater the the NCAA, but there was excitement. It does not seem like there is much excitement heading into tonight’s game. That is due to a lot of issues not just how the season ended.
So it seems your idea of the best team is based on the season, and if that is the case you are right, then winning in the NIT is not being 69. Same reason, I guess why winning the NCAA tourney does not make you necessarily make you the best team either.
Though if that is the thought process why have the tournament? Just do polls.
Last time I checked all the teams know the rules going in, to me you are either in or out, if your out, does not matter how you do in some thanks for playing tournament. 68 are in, #69 is out.
Really find it interesting that some think the NIT was better, I guess winning cures all ill's no matter how meaningless they are.
Last edited:
HawkeyeMike23
Banned
That's absolutely true. A one and done tournament is a terrible way to determine who the best team is. The NCAA tournament is exciting and fun to watch, but the BCS does a much better job of actually crowning the best team each year.
DodgerHawki
Well-Known Member
The NIT (even winning it) is never better than an NCAA appearance. Yes, the team go to play more games last year. But NCAA appearances matter much more in terms of overall program health. Would it have made a difference to a Tyler Ulis to be able to actualy say "we've made it to the NCAA tournament" instead of "we're on a path to make it."
Iowa had a 8-year run of not being in the NCAA tournament. For program momentum/health under Fran, it needed to happen this year. It very well could/should have happened last year, if not for plain back luck (the Jackson 3 bounces high in the air and goes in at Wisconsin, Hollins hits a 3 with under 15 seconds left at Minnesota, etc.) NCAA tournament appearances are what recruits care about, not NIT berths (even deep runs).
Now Fran and his staff can go out and not just say they plan on having a team in the NCAA tournament, they can say it has actually happened. Yes, exiting early from the NCAA tournament is not ideal. Fans hate it. But getting in adds to a program's foundation of credibility.
1977Hawkeye
Well-Known Member
This is absolutely true, and is what happens when you have a system that awards automatic invites to those who win their conference tournaments. It's really not much different than the winner of the Big Ten, ACC, etc. getting automatic BCS bowl invites when you think about it. At least in football, it's based on the regular season, rather than some middling team in a mid-major conference getting hot and winning their conference tournament over the weekend like can happen in NCAA hoops, so I think the BCS tends to do a better job of getting the top teams involved, but there are certainly exceptions.
If you really wanted the best teams in the NCAA tournament, you'd have to eliminate the concept of automatic bids and just take teams 1-64 (or 68) based on who you think are the best teams. Of course, that would render the majority of conference tournaments virtually meaningless, and most mid-major teams wouldn't have the chance to play. I personally like the current setup, since it's nice to see the little guy get a shot. That's where I'm not so much a fan of the BCS.
How would you do it? Like NBA and the NHL? Then you need to just do a top 8 cuz it takes like 2 months for those league playoffs to run their course with 16 teams.
Seems that we would be going down the path of the crappy BCS playoff system.
Each power conference gets 1 team, unless you have a team like WSU team finish in the top 8.
Not saying its a bad idea, just don't know how you manage it.
Last edited:
slickwillard
Well-Known Member
I can see the logic in this. Iowa did have a pretty solid followup season until the last month or so when everything weirdly took a dive. Extra games are a good thing otherwise.
BILLBUCKNER
Well-Known Member
I would have been disapointed had Iowa landed in the NIT this year. This year they took another step in getting the program back to a player in the BIG. I think there are 2 things beyond our control for them to be a major player. Bo Ryan and Tom Izzo retiring. The preferential treatment those two get for their teams is extremely frustrating. Those programs need to slide for us to take their place. This league is so tough...No team is standing pat and accepting to be a bottom feeder unlike other conferences where things never seem to change.
bcl20
Well-Known Member
Who cares about determining the best team? The NCAA tournament is fun and makes a bunch of money and that's what matters the most anyways. It'd be impossible to create a system that would determine the best team in college basketball anyways because there are a lot of teams (Same with college football too.)
I read a rumor on another message board, not an Iowa one, that if Izzo won it all this year, he might hang it up. I find that hard to believe, but who knows. Probably more speculation than anything.
HawkeyeMike23
Banned
I'm fine with the NCAA tournament, it's very fun to watch. It's just not a real good way to determine who the best team is. There are no fluke NBA champions, having to win four, best of seven series eliminates the fluke element.
If you took just the one and two seeds and had them played best of three or five series, you would do a much better job of determining who was actually the best team that year, but it wouldn't be nearly as much fun to watch.
