Is there any scenario at all where winning the NIT is better than just appearing in the NCAA Tournament? I always ask myself this particular week each year when there are NIT games on, and I am reluctantly paying attention to them while I wait for the games that really matter to start on Thursday.
My conclusion on this question is that there is one possibility. If you have a really young team that is pretty talented, but inconsistent throughout the year... and who misses the NCAA Tournament by a decent measure, then I think you could say that winning the NIT was about the best thing that could happen to them in that year. Since the team is young, they have a lot of (albeit water-down) post-season success to spring board their confidence on for the next season or two. Had they made the tournament, they likely would have lost in the 1st round, but since they were so inconsistent throughout the year, they didn't give themselves a chance anyhow. That's the only scenario I can think of where winning the NIT might mean more. However, if this team is a usual power house like the KU's, Duke's, UNC's, Kentucky's of the world, then I think the NIT is always a disappointment, no matter how young and inexperienced you are. The scenario I described above would only make sense if it's a team that generally finishes middle to slightly above average in their conference.
...The more I think about this post though, I wonder why I'm even trying to defend the NIT. The NIT is like that smelly, unkept little kid who shits on the back of the school bus on a field trip to the zoo and thinks it's funny. As much as he tries to impress people, he will always have that hanging over his head.
...Who was I kidding? The NIT is March Sadness to the NCAA Tourney's March Madness.
No comments:
Post a Comment