Irony?


#1

Anyone notice that the other three teams that joined Penn State in last year’s NIT Final Four made the NCAA Tournament.

Baylor (runner-up): 25-7, #7 RPI, #3 seed South Region
Notre Dame: 23-11, #46 RPI, #6 seed South Region
San Diego State, 25-8, #32 RPI, #11 seed Midwest Region (and winners of the MWC Tournament)

In addition, of the 4 teams that lost in the NIT quarterfinals (Florida, Auburn, Kentucky, and St. Mary’s), three of those four teams made the NCAA Tournament this season. BTW, the other team, Auburn, fired their head coach at the end of this season (after finishing 15-17, 6-10 in SEC).


#2

You can also add these teams that played in the NIT last year that NCAA bound: New Mexico, Georgetown, Kansas State, UNLV, with Rhode Island and Virginia Tech where in the conversation until the final week.


#3

On the other hand, last year’s NCAA champion (UNC) finished the season at 16-16.


#4

So I guess some teams actually used the NIT as momentum for an even better 2010 season?


#5

Then again, everyone and their brothers now admits PSU should’ve made the dance last year… so maybe we should judge ourselves against the teams that danced last year and missed this year?


#6

Thats an easy one look at Virginia Tech who played a horrible OOC schedule like us and they beat Wake, GT and couple others that are in the tournament.


#7

Basically Spike the Kool-Aid discussed this last week regarding how teams that were in the NIT last year are doing this year. And how every team besides PSU used the NIT as a springboard for it’s current season.

It’s absolutely good analysis and I appreciate those comments and this thread. Basically it goes to show that PSU is the exception to the rule of the NIT having benefits going into the following season.

How many of those teams that were in the NIT last year and in the NCAA Tournament this year lost 3 seniors from last year’s team and had no seniors on this year’s team? Could that be a factor as to why PSU didn’t follow the trend?


#8

[quote=“PSUChamp08, post:7, topic:976”]Basically Spike the Kool-Aid discussed this last week regarding how teams that were in the NIT last year are doing this year. And how every team besides PSU used the NIT as a springboard for it’s current season.

It’s absolutely good analysis and I appreciate those comments and this thread. Basically it goes to show that PSU is the exception to the rule of the NIT having benefits going into the following season.

How many of those teams that were in the NIT last year and in the NCAA Tournament this year lost 3 seniors from last year’s team and had no seniors on this year’s team? Could that be a factor as to why PSU didn’t follow the trend?[/quote]

Baylor (3), Notre Dame (3), San Diego State (lost 4), St. Mary’s lost two (Mills and Simpson combined 31 ppg)


#9

We can look at this 563 more ways and no one is going to be swayed from their current position on Ed and the state of the program, yet for some reason we keep getting sucked into discussing this until we are blue in the face, myself included.


#10

After watching the NCAA Tournament Selection show, they discussed the “snubs” from last season and I didn’t hear Penn State mentioned once. But, I did hear St. Mary’s vs. Arizona a few times?

Since you or I or anyone else will never know just how “close” PSU came to be in the field last season, whether or not they “should” have been invited is a moot point. For all we know, they may have been the third or fourth team or fifth team “out”.

The fact is, they didn’t get invited. And after they didn’t get invited, the position was posed that it was “better” to have made the NIT and won the championship than been one and done in the NCAA Tournament. Based on how the other teams who made the NIT Final Four last season fared this season, that seems to be a valid argument, unless, of course, your team is coached by Ed DeChellis.


#11

Good call.


#12
[quote="Craftsy21, post:5, topic:976"]Then again, everyone and their brothers now admits PSU should've made the dance last year... so maybe we should judge ourselves against the teams that danced last year and missed this year?[/quote] After watching the NCAA Tournament Selection show, they discussed the "snubs" from last season and I didn't hear Penn State mentioned once. But, I did hear St. Mary's vs. Arizona a few times?

Since you or I or anyone else will never know just how “close” PSU came to be in the field last season, whether or not they “should” have been invited is a moot point. For all we know, they may have been the third or fourth team or fifth team “out”.

The fact is, they didn’t get invited. And after they didn’t get invited, the position was posed that it was “better” to have made the NIT and won the championship than been one and done in the NCAA Tournament. Based on how the other teams who made the NIT Final Four last season fared this season, that seems to be a valid argument, unless, of course, your team is coached by Ed DeChellis.

For the record, I think everyone was meaning we’d be better for it in 2 years time… not this year.

And I’ve heard numerous guys doing our games this year and on the radio saying that we should’ve been in the dance last year, during this season. I think most of that was done after we went on to win the NIT, but regardless that’s what was said.


#13

[quote=“PSUChamp08, post:7, topic:976”]Basically Spike the Kool-Aid discussed this last week regarding how teams that were in the NIT last year are doing this year. And how every team besides PSU used the NIT as a springboard for it’s current season.

It’s absolutely good analysis and I appreciate those comments and this thread. Basically it goes to show that PSU is the exception to the rule of the NIT having benefits going into the following season.

How many of those teams that were in the NIT last year and in the NCAA Tournament this year lost 3 seniors from last year’s team and had no seniors on this year’s team? Could that be a factor as to why PSU didn’t follow the trend?[/quote]
I can always be used an excuse though. ::slight_smile:

I wonder how many teams who made the NIT finished 16 games worse in the win column and 9 games worse in the loss column?

If we accept your premise that the team fell so far because they lost three seniors, what can be expected after next season, when the Lions lose nearly their entire starting lineup from this season?


#14
[quote="Craftsy21, post:5, topic:976"]Then again, everyone and their brothers now admits PSU should've made the dance last year... so maybe we should judge ourselves against the teams that danced last year and missed this year?[/quote] After watching the NCAA Tournament Selection show, they discussed the "snubs" from last season and I didn't hear Penn State mentioned once. But, I did hear St. Mary's vs. Arizona a few times?

Since you or I or anyone else will never know just how “close” PSU came to be in the field last season, whether or not they “should” have been invited is a moot point. For all we know, they may have been the third or fourth team or fifth team “out”.

The fact is, they didn’t get invited. And after they didn’t get invited, the position was posed that it was “better” to have made the NIT and won the championship than been one and done in the NCAA Tournament. Based on how the other teams who made the NIT Final Four last season fared this season, that seems to be a valid argument, unless, of course, your team is coached by Ed DeChellis.

For the record, I think everyone was meaning we’d be better for it in 2 years time… not this year.


Good thing you are around to interpret what everyone means when they say what they say. ::slight_smile:

In my next life, I hope I am a just a portion as enlightened as you.


#15

The question was posed as a means to further the discussion to examine reasons why PSU didn’t follow the trend of NIT teams last season. You create a thread like this, which was basically the exact same thing as you discussed last week. And I even say I appreciate this discussion. Then when I ask a question to try to make sense of why PSU didn’t follow the trend, you label it as an excuse?

Why do you feel the need to hammer things like this into the ground. We know PSU didn’t follow the trend of the majority of NIT teams last season. This has been stated over and over and over again. We get it.

My premise? It’s not even a premise of anything. It’s a statement of fact to try to provide explanation as to why PSU didn’t follow the trend.

Could it be the combination of losing 3 seniors and not having a single senior on the roster this season?

As far as what could be expected after next season, it’s different because after next season, there will be seniors on the team, unlike this year.


#16
[quote="Craftsy21, post:5, topic:976"]Then again, everyone and their brothers now admits PSU should've made the dance last year... so maybe we should judge ourselves against the teams that danced last year and missed this year?[/quote] After watching the NCAA Tournament Selection show, they discussed the "snubs" from last season and I didn't hear Penn State mentioned once. But, I did hear St. Mary's vs. Arizona a few times?

Since you or I or anyone else will never know just how “close” PSU came to be in the field last season, whether or not they “should” have been invited is a moot point. For all we know, they may have been the third or fourth team or fifth team “out”.

The fact is, they didn’t get invited. And after they didn’t get invited, the position was posed that it was “better” to have made the NIT and won the championship than been one and done in the NCAA Tournament. Based on how the other teams who made the NIT Final Four last season fared this season, that seems to be a valid argument, unless, of course, your team is coached by Ed DeChellis.

For the record, I think everyone was meaning we’d be better for it in 2 years time… not this year.


Good thing you are around to interpret what everyone means when they say what they say. ::slight_smile:

In my next life, I hope I am a just a portion as enlightened as you.

Speaking of irony, it’s always funny to see you accusing somebody else of being a know-it-all.


#17

If you guys are going to beat this dead horse then you should really go back a bunch of years and look at what happened to the NIT Final 4 teams over a longer period of time.


#18
I can always be used an excuse though. ::)

The question was posed as a means to further the discussion to examine reasons why PSU didn’t follow the trend of NIT teams last season. You create a thread like this, which was basically the exact same thing as you discussed last week. And I even say I appreciate this discussion. Then when I ask a question to try to make sense of why PSU didn’t follow the trend, you label it as an excuse?

I wonder how many teams who made the NIT finished 16 games worse in the win column and 9 games worse in the loss column?

Why do you feel the need to hammer things like this into the ground. We know PSU didn’t follow the trend of the majority of NIT teams last season. This has been stated over and over and over again. We get it.

If we accept your premise that the team fell so far because they lost three seniors, what can be expected after next season, when the Lions lose nearly their entire starting lineup from this season?

My premise? It’s not even a premise of anything. It’s a statement of fact to try to provide explanation as to why PSU didn’t follow the trend.

Could it be the combination of losing 3 seniors and not having a single senior on the roster this season?

As far as what could be expected after next season, it’s different because after next season, there will be seniors on the team, unlike this year.


Not trying to be sarcastic ,but I have a question you might choose to answer and then again maybe not. What would it take from next year’s results for you to say Ed probably isn’t the answer for PSU basketball?

#19

[quote=“Spike the Kool-Aid, post:1, topic:976”]Anyone notice that the other three teams that joined Penn State in last year’s NIT Final Four made the NCAA Tournament.

Baylor (runner-up): 25-7, #7 RPI, #3 seed South Region
Notre Dame: 23-11, #46 RPI, #6 seed South Region
San Diego State, 25-8, #32 RPI, #11 seed Midwest Region (and winners of the MWC Tournament)

In addition, of the 4 teams that lost in the NIT quarterfinals (Florida, Auburn, Kentucky, and St. Mary’s), three of those four teams made the NCAA Tournament this season. BTW, the other team, Auburn, fired their head coach at the end of this season (after finishing 15-17, 6-10 in SEC).[/quote]

This is not irony. The deep rounds NIT are and will be our peak of this program under this administration and coaching staff. Those other programs, under their current coaches, will usually make the NIT when they miss the NCAA. We’re not on the same page as them because Curley has no idea what he is doing, Ed does not belong in the Big Ten, and many fans enable the mediocrity through apathy (or the less common proclamation that they have found a stat that proves Ed has ‘bad luck’ and therefore Ed is just fine).


#20
I can always be used an excuse though. ::)

The question was posed as a means to further the discussion to examine reasons why PSU didn’t follow the trend of NIT teams last season. You create a thread like this, which was basically the exact same thing as you discussed last week. And I even say I appreciate this discussion. Then when I ask a question to try to make sense of why PSU didn’t follow the trend, you label it as an excuse?

I wonder how many teams who made the NIT finished 16 games worse in the win column and 9 games worse in the loss column?

Why do you feel the need to hammer things like this into the ground. We know PSU didn’t follow the trend of the majority of NIT teams last season. This has been stated over and over and over again. We get it.

If we accept your premise that the team fell so far because they lost three seniors, what can be expected after next season, when the Lions lose nearly their entire starting lineup from this season?

My premise? It’s not even a premise of anything. It’s a statement of fact to try to provide explanation as to why PSU didn’t follow the trend.

Could it be the combination of losing 3 seniors and not having a single senior on the roster this season?

As far as what could be expected after next season, it’s different because after next season, there will be seniors on the team, unlike this year.


The fact is PSU lost 3 seniors. Period. There is no premise in that.

My question is where is the supposed “improvement”, that more than a few people championed to be beneficial, from winning the NIT championship? Three other teams that also made the NIT Final Four seemed to have improved their record and results this season. Why did not PSU do the same?

You offered a premise that seems to mean to answer that question. Your premise is whether any of those teams suffered the same losses as PSU and whether they also had a roster without any seniors?

From the information that has been presented here, there are three other teams that shared the spotlight of the NIT Final Four that suffered similar losses, yet overcame those supposed hindrances to end their season in the NCAA Tournament, while PSU ended their season with 20 losses and a spot in last place of the Big Ten.