2017 National Invitation Tournament (NIT)

[Blue & Gold]

Akron Beacon: Zips buoyed by win over Houston, prepare for NIT game against Texas-Arlington

 

Cleveland.com: Akron Zips look to continue road success at UT-Arlington

[Captain Kangaroo]

13 hours ago, morris buttermaker said:

 That Houston- and the city/ fans were uninspired... echoing what Blackburn said

Not quite...he stated the teams were uninspired. And then qualified his point with an attendance number.... a qualifier that left several of us justifiably puzzled.

 

I remember the old GP1 signature: "You want it to be one way, but it's the other."  Rings true here.

 

Go Zips! Beat Texas Arlington Road!

[Sportsjunkie330]

Teams like Akron, Houston, Texas Arlington, etc play inspired in the NIT.

 

Teams like Syracuse, Indiana, BYU, etc don't care about the NIT until later in the tournament. 

 

Most fans don't care about the NIT.

[zippy5]

11 minutes ago, Sportsjunkie330 said:

Teams like Akron, Houston, Texas Arlington, etc play inspired in the NIT.

 

Houston wasn't inspired, there were only 1,900 people there

[bUAkronG]

I believe the general concesus is that most teams are less inspired to play in the NIT than the NCAA's, but really that's not saying anything ground breaking.  

Edited March 20, 2017 by bUAkronG

[NWAkron]

Illinois State...What a way to lose.  Refs completely controlled end of that game.  Fouls on both ends changing outcome within seconds both ways.  UCF came back from 13 down at half

[bUAkronG]

And adding insult to injury, CSU Bakersfield beat Colorado State so the Zips could have hosted them for a chance to reach MSG

Edited March 21, 2017 by bUAkronG

[bUAkronG]

Well CSU Bakersfield went into Arlington last night and whooped on UTA in a 90-78 win. 

 

Much like the game Monday night, it appeared like one team came out fired up and motivated and the other had a hard time playing their own game. 

 

I wonder how often 8 seeds make it to MSG. Just further hammers home the point that the seeding was all wrong. 

 

[kreed5120]

The talent disparity in the NIT isn't as great as the NCAAT. Any team can beat any team. CSUB deserved the 8 seed based off their performance in the regular season as their schedule made Akron's look like a world beater. To their credit they stepped up their game. Seeds aren't awarded off of hindsight.

 

In general I feel the NIT is a much more challenging tournament to seed. You don't know which teams will treat it like an opportunity and which treat it like a punishment.

Edited March 23, 2017 by kreed5120

[MDZip]

2 hours ago, bUAkronG said:

I wonder how often 8 seeds make it to MSG. Just further hammers home the point that the seeding was all wrong. 

According to the announcers this is the first time ever a #8 seed made the semis (and the first time ever no #1 seed made the quarters).

[skip-zip]

2 hours ago, kreed5120 said:

In general I feel the NIT is a much more challenging conference to seed. You don't know which teams will treat it like an opportunity and which treat it like a punish.

 

Nobody would contend that they should try to determine who will take it seriously, and who will not  Their job is to put the best at the top, and the worst at the bottom.  And that does not include giving home games to "name programs" who will cry if they don't get a home game.

 

58 minutes ago, MDZip said:

According to the announcers this is the first time ever a #8 seed made the semis (and the first time ever no #1 seed made the quarters).

 

Further proof that a much-maligned situation has gotten worse.  In fact, historically its worst.    

[zippy5]

So this is where we are. Bashing the NIT selection committee. Who cares

[Captain Kangaroo]

3 hours ago, bUAkronG said:

Well CSU Bakersfield went into Arlington last night and whooped on UTA in a 90-78 win.

 

Not quite a "whoop": Actual score 80 - 76

 

It was a fun basketball game to watch. UTA played from behind all night, but never gave up. Great crowd support. 

 

The Zips should pursue a home-home with UTA. 

[skip-zip]

25 minutes ago, Captain Kangaroo said:

Not quite a "whoop":

 

Arlington trailed by 16 at the half, and by as many as 20 in the 2nd half.   Arlington made THREE 3-pointers in the final 30 seconds to make it look WAY closer. 

 

Call it what you wish.  It's convincing, at a minimum.  

[clarkwgriswold]

With the nature of the NIT teams, you could just throw all of their names into hats by region and pull them out in pairs to match them up for games.

[bUAkronG]

18 hours ago, Captain Kangaroo said:

Not quite a "whoop": Actual score 80 - 76

 

It was a fun basketball game to watch. UTA played from behind all night, but never gave up. Great crowd support. 

 

The Zips should pursue a home-home with UTA. 

 

Hmm, not sure where I saw 90-78. 

 

I watched the first half. UTA got whooped that half. I did not watch the second half but when I checked the score on my phone they were down 20. I thought I saw the final score as a 12 point win so that's where the whooped comment came from.

 

Zips should pursue a home and home with just about any of the teams that made the NIT. The field was full of quality mid majors and low high majors(Iowa, Cuse notwithstanding) 

[skip-zip]

16 minutes ago, bUAkronG said:

Zips should pursue a home and home with just about any of the teams that made the NIT. The field was full of quality mid majors and low high majors(Iowa, Cuse notwithstanding) 

 

Pretty much any "high major" is going to be considered a Low High Major if they are in the NIT.  At least for the current year, when you consider the number of teams from their conferences that are given NCAA bids.  There were 34 bids given to those 6 "major" conferences (adding in the Big East to the list of recognized Majors for basketball).

[bUAkronG]

7 minutes ago, skip-zip said:

 

Pretty much any "high major" is going to be considered a Low High Major if they are in the NIT.  At least for the current year, when you consider the number of teams from their conferences that are given NCAA bids.  There were 34 bids given to those 6 "major" conferences (adding in the Big East to the list of recognized Majors for basketball).

 

I just didn't want to get jumped on for not mentioning that there were some high major teams in the NIT that the Zips would likely have a hard time scheduling a home and home with. 

 

When I mention a low high major I'm thinking of teams like Georgia Tech and Illinois which come from high major conferences but in my eyes haven't really been household name teams in recent years. 

[kreed5120]

Part of the problem with that is so many mid-majors are good 1 year then bad the next. Last year Ark-Little Rock was the hot team in the SunBelt. This year it was UTA. There are some schools that are consistently good just about every year like Belmont or Valpo.

Edited March 24, 2017 by kreed5120

[gozips19]

1 hour ago, bUAkronG said:

 

Hmm, not sure where I saw 90-78. 

 

I watched the first half. UTA got whooped that half. I did not watch the second half but when I checked the score on my phone they were down 20. I thought I saw the final score as a 12 point win so that's where the whooped comment came from.

 

Zips should pursue a home and home with just about any of the teams that made the NIT. The field was full of quality mid majors and low high majors(Iowa, Cuse notwithstanding) 

 

I only was able to watch the end of the 2nd half. UTA had just got the score down to 6 with around 3min to go. Cal got a steal and Bilbo reached out and fouled the player resulting in a flagrant 1. Cal hits both foul shots and scores on the following possession to get the lead back to 10. Game. So a little closer that the final box score 

[GJGood]

This year the Zips were a 7 seed in the NIT, last year they were a 6 seed in the NIT. Looking at both brackets I see that we are not the only team that can make that exact claim. Belmont was the same seed both years as well. Maybe they should be high on our list of schools to pursue a home and home series with.

[ZippyRulz]

I've got to support the eastern G5 team @MSG...go UCF

Edited March 24, 2017 by ZippyRulz

[skip-zip]

3 hours ago, bUAkronG said:

When I mention a low high major I'm thinking of teams like Georgia Tech and Illinois which come from high major conferences but in my eyes haven't really been household name teams in recent years. 

 

I actually like the term.  There's plenty of very average and below average teams in those conferences that don't deserve the favoritism they get, just because they are a member of those conferences.  

 

But are they really any less of a Household Name?  Or just possibly haven't had as many successful seasons lately as they did in the past?  Joe American Sports Fan couldn't tell us their recent records, and doesn't see them any differently today when comparing them to MAC schools.  

[Blue & Gold]

I'd love to play either GT or Illinois.  Those schools are D-1 aristocracy.  Maybe the best of the best look down on them, but 95% of NCAA schools would consider those to be solid wins.

[skip-zip]

2 hours ago, gozips19 said:

 

I only was able to watch the end of the 2nd half. UTA had just got the score down to 6 with around 3min to go. Cal got a steal and Bilbo reached out and fouled the player resulting in a flagrant 1. Cal hits both foul shots and scores on the following possession to get the lead back to 10. Game. So a little closer that the final box score 

 

You think it looked closer than 4 (the final margin)?  

 

Come on.  I'd LOVE to minimize UTA's loss, considering what happened to us down there.  But I can't. They trailed by double digits (and as many as 20) for most of the last 3/4 of the game.  The 3 straight 3-pointers drained by UTA in the final frantic 30 seconds is the only reason it even "looked" close at all.  

 

 

Edited March 24, 2017 by skip-zip