Futility

1987alum · Post by **1987alum** » Thu Mar 17, 2005 5:39 pm

Schade:

Missed this post earlier. Have to say, that is some excellent research, resulting in one of the most depressing conclusions I've seen in some time. I think Finally in 04 has the right idea ... we need to continue building positive momentum, become a consistent MAC contender.

Still, to think we're worse off than a blind squirrel in the winter ...

orangeandbrown · Post by **orangeandbrown** » Thu Mar 17, 2005 6:13 pm

Yeah, but you don't build up to it with three NIT bids first.

Schadenfreude · Post by **Schadenfreude** » Thu Mar 17, 2005 6:36 pm

1987alum wrote:Missed this post earlier. Have to say, that is some excellent research,

Thanks. I had been curious about it most of the season.[/quote]

golfertk14 · Post by **golfertk14** » Fri Mar 18, 2005 8:23 am

ZiggyZoomba wrote:
hammb wrote:
golfertk14 wrote:there's always next year
Well, that pretty much proves that he is DEFINTELY from Cleveland
AND that he hasn't been going to BG Basketball games for 27 "next years...." *sigh*

zz i never said it was easy-i've felt heartbreak with my Indians in 1995 and '97. I'm just saying never give up, it'll be our turn one year.

Dayons_Den · Post by **Dayons_Den** » Fri Mar 18, 2005 9:52 am

Finally in 04 wrote:Right now we just need to play our game, our way. Lets start by consistently getting NIT berths and going far.

Ummmmm no.

N.I.T.= Not In Tournament.

1987alum · Post by **1987alum** » Fri Mar 18, 2005 10:12 am

Dayons_Den wrote:
Finally in 04 wrote:Right now we just need to play our game, our way. Lets start by consistently getting NIT berths and going far.

Ummmmm no.

N.I.T.= Not In Tournament.

Well, gang, not to put too fine a point on it, but I don't think we're in a position to be snooty about the NIT. It's a matter of incremental steps, I mean, I don't think the program is going to go from its present state to a Final Four run.

To wit, consider this progression ...

2006: Advance to the MAC Tournament semifinals; possible NIT berth
2007: Play in the MAC Tournament title game; possible NCAA berth, probably NIT berth
2008: Win the MAC Tournament; NCAA berth
2009: Win the MAC Tournament; win first-round NCAA game

I guess I don't see that as all that terrible, especially since we haven't been to the NCAA tournament since Richard Nixon was popular.

Dayons_Den · Post by **Dayons_Den** » Fri Mar 18, 2005 10:33 am

The thing with the NIT though is they don't necassarily work like an NCAA committee. They don't reward the better team they give home games to the team that can bring in the most revenue for the NIT- a for profit venture.

I guess I just don't see how taking steps would mean aiming for NIT games. I don't see how advancing to the NIT has much of a corrolation with earning an NCAA bid.

As Hammb has so eloquently stated- Just Win The Damn MAC tourney!!!!

1987alum · Post by **1987alum** » Fri Mar 18, 2005 10:38 am

Just so I'm clear, you're saying it's the NCAA tournament or nothing? In other words, you'd rather stay home than at least get an NIT bid? I guess I'd rather be in Western Michigan's situation than our situation. Best case, yeah, I'd like BG to win the MAC tournament. But short of that, I'd like to at least make an incremental step forward.

Then again, I'm not much of a college basketball fan ...

Dayons_Den · Post by **Dayons_Den** » Fri Mar 18, 2005 11:27 am

Thanks for putting it so black and white for me- NCAA or stay home. Hmmmm I actually am leaning towards saying that, yes.

The NIT is NOT to college basketball what Bowl Games are to college football, if you follow my SAT-like statement.

The goal in college football is the post season- a bowl game. Why? A number of reasosns- exposure for the team (recruits) and school (potential students, alums etc.), hopefully some money from the prestige of making it to the Weed-Whacker Bowl, and of course the coveted extra practice time.

Now conversely with an NIT and not NCAA bid you really get none of those- minimal exposure, no money, and really no tangible extra practice time. Also, you often get a really poor showing from a team that feels it "should" have made it to the NCAAs (read BG @BYU, Butler and the 91 and 92 appearances).

I don't think a program is really aiming high by saying lets make it to the NITs and build from there. What they should be thinking, in my opinion obviously, is lets finish in the top 3 in the league or win our division then build from there.

1987alum · Post by **1987alum** » Fri Mar 18, 2005 11:37 am

DD:

That would be great if we were on the precipice of finishing in the top three, but that does not appear to be the case.

The longest journey begins with a single step.

Schadenfreude · Post by **Schadenfreude** » Fri Mar 18, 2005 1:39 pm

1987alum wrote:we haven't been to the NCAA tournament since Richard Nixon was popular.

Actually, I think Nixon was still trying to seal up the nomination.

Lyndon Johnson was president.

1987alum · Post by **1987alum** » Fri Mar 18, 2005 1:42 pm

Schadenfreude wrote:
1987alum wrote:we haven't been to the NCAA tournament since Richard Nixon was popular.
Actually, I think Nixon was still trying to seal up the nomination.

Lyndon Johnson was president.

But Nixon was popular ... for reasons we'll have to explain to historians for some time to come ...