2007 Nit
 

Anyone with any comments on the NIT games, this thread is for you.

Michigan holds on and beats Utah St. The WAC team had its chances.

Drexel is giving NC State all it can handle as it currently leads the Wolf Pack 49-46 with 6 minutes left.

NC State came back and won.

So how is it people seemed to think Drexel got shafted by the NCAA, but yet they were still seeded 3rd in their region? And, of course, they still lose their first-round game.

I've found that what happens in the NIT is not a good indicator of what a team could have or would have done in the NCAA. Teams sometimes are disappointed or don't care when they play in the NIT.

UMass/Alabama was a great game.

Alabama hits a 3 at the buzzer to force OT.
Alabama makes a put back with 9.1 left in OT to tie it.

UMass makes a FT line jumper with 1.6 left to win it.

Also there was an interesting clock issue with 24 seconds remaining in the OT. Somehow when the game went to OT and the clock was set for those five minutes the tenths of a second display went away. Since no one would know this until there was less than 1 minute remaining, the officials noticed it during a stoppage at 24 seconds and had the clock display changed to show the tenths as required by rule. 24.6 was put on the display and the game was finished.

I think you're probably right, but how could you have "found" this, when the teams can only play in one or the other? There's no way to compare what they do in the NIT with what they "would've done" in the NCAA. ;)

I once worked a sort of "consolation" tournament for D3 college teams that got bounced from their conference tourney early. It was like working a scrimmage. Our locker room was next to the losing team's locker room and there was no emotion at all at halftime when it was still a close game.

It was terrific, but I can't stay up to watch when the OT period starts at 11:40 pm. :(

Tivo, DVD recorder, VCR ???

You are old beyond your years......

You must be a Rangers fan.

I was watching in bed, and don\'t have any of those in the bedroom.

Don\'t I know it.

In these parts, the most entertaining thing has been Steve Alford whining in a press conference about Iowa being left out of the NIT. It\'s a pretty good clip. He begins by saying how he isn\'t going to make excuses and whine, then he spends the next 10 minutes making excuses and whining about how the 4th place team in the Big 10 has always been in the NIT. I guess there\'s a first time for everything.

No one expected Iowa to be tied for 4th in the conference, and I don\'t think doing so really changed anyone\'s mind about how good they were. I think it\'s funny about how after not expecting this team to do much, people are all over Alford for not making the tournament. I was on the Alford bandwagon when they hired him, but have grown less and less enamored. His post season record is even worse than his conference record, though.

I agree. He\'s just getting ripped because you don\'t often hear of a team from a big time conference crying about getting into the NIT. If he was complaining about the NCAA it wouldn\'t be a story. Alfor just never seems to make his players better. They look like the same player their freshman year that they look like their senior year. When they were hired, who\'d have thought that Kirk would be the good hire?

I\'ve noticed that, too. Glen Worley was a classic example. Great freshman who looked like he\'d be all conference by the time he was a junior. By the time his senior year came along, he looked like a decent freshman.
I remember the hirings, too. They jumped at Alford because the impression across the state was he\'d lost out on Stoops and had to settle for Ferentz. Not so incidentally, Ferentz\' strength has been developing players over their time with him. Alford\'s weakness has been player development and retention.