jonny come lately

[flyfishingfrog]

If we win I think it will be kind of like the Alamo bowl win - a good win against some good teams that we frogs will remember a lot more than others

But it's not the same as a NY6 bowl (or the Dance in this case)

However I agree with others that it means you were somewhere in the high 20's to mid 30's in overall rank.

A big chunk of the field in the NCAA auto qualified or wouldn't have been in and the selection committee always makes a couple of questionable decisions - although this year was less controversial

 

[Gehörnter Frosch]

Just look at some of the recent NIT championship games, and it gives you an idea of the future potential for TCU basketball.

Winners listed first:

2016 - George Washington vs. Valparaiso
2015 - Stanford vs. Miami (FL)
2014 - Minnesota vs. SMU
2013 - Baylor vs. Iowa
2012 - Stanford vs. Minnesota
2011 - Wichita State vs. Alabama
2010 - Dayton vs. North Carolina
2009 - Penn State vs. Baylor
2008 - Ohio State vs. Massachusetts
2007 - West Virginia vs. Clemson
2006 - South Carolina vs. Michigan
2005 - South Carolina vs. Saint Joseph's
2004 - Michigan vs. Rutgers

 

[Jefffrog1993]

There are 68 teams in NCAA March Madness so in my world we are the 69'th best team and 69 is my favorite number.

 

[Tom Brown]

If you are Gregg Marshall at Wichita State, you can win the NIT and make a backhanded remark about KU being "chickenhawks" (who lost in the Elite 8 that year) and look like a classless dumbass.

Yes, happy to have the opportunity but is shows we didn't have a good enough entire regular season to be worthy of an invite to the better party.

He's done well against those chicken hawks.

 

[Ray Finkle]

He's done well against those chicken hawks.

He hadn't even played them at that point, KU lost in the Elite 8, and KU was 3 years removed from the 2008 National Championship. He's won 1 game against KU. We've won 2.

Classless remark on his end. You don't pound your chest at a blue-blood program after winning the NIT.

 

[Gary's Shirtless Revenge]

The NIT "means" nothing... It simply gives TCU:

- $$$
- Practices
- Exposure (See: ESPN games in prime time, NYC media and times square exposure, etc)

It also has the added bonus this year of being the "reward" for the seniors, who have committed to this program despite the [ Finebaum ]ty investment we put up for their first three years or so. I wish that the program could have delivered a NCAA appearance, but NIT is good still.

 

[Tom Brown]

He hadn't even played them at that point, KU lost in the Elite 8, and KU was 3 years removed from the 2008 National Championship. He's won 1 game against KU. We've won 2.

Classless remark on his end. You don't pound your chest at a blue-blood program after winning the NIT.

You missed my point he has backed it up. They didnt and dont want to schedule them so he just beat them in post season.

 

[OmniscienceFrog]

The NIT is where TCU needed to be this year and it has been a fun ride so far.

This NIT run has been much more useful than a one and done NCAA appearance would have been.

 

[bcsbuster]

Bcsbuster hasn't come lately. It has been a long time.

 

[BABYFACE]

If we win I think it will be kind of like the Alamo bowl win - a good win against some good teams that we frogs will remember a lot more than others

But it's not the same as a NY6 bowl (or the Dance in this case)

However I agree with others that it means you were somewhere in the high 20's to mid 30's in overall rank.

A big chunk of the field in the NCAA auto qualified or wouldn't have been in and the selection committee always makes a couple of questionable decisions - although this year was less controversial

Agree

 

[WyomingFrog]

Utterly ridiculous statement. The Selection Committee takes all of that into account including the strength of schedule, number of wins, level of competition and ranking, in order select teams (Q's - meaning Qualifiers). Some of the AQ's (Automatic Qualifiers) were in fact better teams than the Q's and some of the AQ's beat Q's in the first round, or played the Q's right down to the wire (i.e. - Princeton (AQ) vs Notre Dame (Q) 60-58), or (i.e. - Rhode Island (AQ) won their First Round game and then took a Final Four team (Oregon) to the wire 75-72). All the Q's were obviously better than Tcu (58 teams) and all the AQ's are also better than TCU with maybe just one or two exceptions.

Your statement is merely a overflowing PollyAnna dose of Purple Kool Aid. But I will admit that the NIT is good for getting extra practices, extra motivation for next year, and maybe even some higher profile recruiting. But as far as rankings go from the experts and all the ranking services, it just aint better because all the NCAA rejects got together and had their own Tournament and someone became the best out of all the other rejects.

There is upside to this Tournament but not what you are trying so hard to imply, that Tcu is now NCAA quality because they beat 3 very average teams in a Tournament with no excellent teams in it.

This is not true because we're a better team then some of those 64 - some of the teams that made the big dance were automatic bids from mid-major conferences.

This is not true because we're a better team then some of those 64 - some of the teams that made the big dance were automatic bids from mid-major conferences.

 

[frognutz]

Utterly ridiculous statement. The Selection Committee takes all of that into account including the strength of schedule, number of wins, level of competition and ranking, in order select teams (Q's - meaning Qualifiers). Some of the AQ's (Automatic Qualifiers) were in fact better teams than the Q's and some of the AQ's beat Q's in the first round, or played the Q's right down to the wire (i.e. - Princeton (AQ) vs Notre Dame (Q) 60-58), or (i.e. - Rhode Island (AQ) won their First Round game and then took a Final Four team (Oregon) to the wire 75-72). All the Q's were obviously better than Tcu (58 teams) and all the AQ's are also better than TCU with maybe just one or two exceptions.

Your statement is merely a overflowing PollyAnna dose of Purple Kool Aid. But I will admit that the NIT is good for getting extra practices, extra motivation for next year, and maybe even some higher profile recruiting. But as far as rankings go from the experts and all the ranking services, it just aint better because all the NCAA rejects got together and had their own Tournament and someone became the best out of all the other rejects.

There is upside to this Tournament but not what you are trying so hard to imply, that Tcu is now NCAA quality because they beat 3 very average teams in a Tournament with no excellent teams in it.

You realize you called his statement utterly ridiculous and then agreed with him correct?

 

[MTfrog5]

Utterly ridiculous statement. The Selection Committee takes all of that into account including the strength of schedule, number of wins, level of competition and ranking, in order select teams (Q's - meaning Qualifiers). Some of the AQ's (Automatic Qualifiers) were in fact better teams than the Q's and some of the AQ's beat Q's in the first round, or played the Q's right down to the wire (i.e. - Princeton (AQ) vs Notre Dame (Q) 60-58), or (i.e. - Rhode Island (AQ) won their First Round game and then took a Final Four team (Oregon) to the wire 75-72). All the Q's were obviously better than Tcu (58 teams) and all the AQ's are also better than TCU with maybe just one or two exceptions.

Your statement is merely a overflowing PollyAnna dose of Purple Kool Aid. But I will admit that the NIT is good for getting extra practices, extra motivation for next year, and maybe even some higher profile recruiting. But as far as rankings go from the experts and all the ranking services, it just aint better because all the NCAA rejects got together and had their own Tournament and someone became the best out of all the other rejects.

There is upside to this Tournament but not what you are trying so hard to imply, that Tcu is now NCAA quality because they beat 3 very average teams in a Tournament with no excellent teams in it.

You're so right

 

[Peacefrog]

Utterly ridiculous statement. The Selection Committee takes all of that into account including the strength of schedule, number of wins, level of competition and ranking, in order select teams (Q's - meaning Qualifiers). Some of the AQ's (Automatic Qualifiers) were in fact better teams than the Q's and some of the AQ's beat Q's in the first round, or played the Q's right down to the wire (i.e. - Princeton (AQ) vs Notre Dame (Q) 60-58), or (i.e. - Rhode Island (AQ) won their First Round game and then took a Final Four team (Oregon) to the wire 75-72). All the Q's were obviously better than Tcu (58 teams) and all the AQ's are also better than TCU with maybe just one or two exceptions.

Your statement is merely a overflowing PollyAnna dose of Purple Kool Aid. But I will admit that the NIT is good for getting extra practices, extra motivation for next year, and maybe even some higher profile recruiting. But as far as rankings go from the experts and all the ranking services, it just aint better because all the NCAA rejects got together and had their own Tournament and someone became the best out of all the other rejects.

There is upside to this Tournament but not what you are trying so hard to imply, that Tcu is now NCAA quality because they beat 3 very average teams in a Tournament with no excellent teams in it.

Just so I have my facts straight - you honestly believe that all the 15 and 16 seeds in the NCAA tournament this year, with the exception of one or two, are better teams than the Frogs? By that rationale you believe all of those 15 and 16 seeded teams, with the exception of one or two, would have won more Big12 games than the Frogs?

That's ridiculous.

Hell, throw in the 13 and 14 seeds too. Still ridiculous. And that isn't Kool aid talking.

 

[MTfrog5]

Just so I have my facts straight - you honestly believe that all the 15 and 16 seeds in the NCAA tournament this year, with the exception of one or two, are better teams than the Frogs? By that rationale you believe all of those 15 and 16 seeded teams, with the exception of one or two, would have won more Big12 games than the Frogs?

That's ridiculous.

Stop being utterly ridiculous

 

[WyomingFrog]

Hard to deal with hypotheticals but WESTERN KENTUCKY (#15 seed) played KENTUCKY within 9 points. Doubt Tcu could have done that this year. RHODE ISLAND played OREGON to within 3 pts and OREGON is a Final 4 team. Don't think TCU can beat Final 4 teams just because Frogs beat 3 very mediocre teams in a Tournament made up of teams that were all rejects.

Don't get me wrong. The NIT is a great thing for Frogs this year. Lots of good here. But trying to say that because TCU beat a collection of bad teams, they would now be NCAA Tournament quality is stone cold foolishness. NCAA next year though most likely so good things happening overall.

I just find the Purple Kool Aid posts about how TCU is now better than NCAA Tournament teams to be dopey.

 

[WyomingFrog]

Previous poster intimated that TCU is now better than lots of NCAA teams. Not true. Probably not better than any of them. But maybe - MAYBE - Tcu might be better than just 1 or 2.

That isn't even worth making a post about. I said if Tcu wins the NIT they are the 65th best team in the country. The poster disagreeing with me says _ "NO THAT AINT RIGHT, TCU MIGHT BE THE 63rd BEST"

Really ? And that is worth telling me that I am wrong by calling Tcu the 65th best ?

OK you win.....if TCU wins the NIT I will admit they are the 63rd best.

Geeeeezz !! What a beating some of you dense ones are !! Wow. You really want to argue that ?

You realize you called his statement utterly ridiculous and then agreed with him correct?

 

[frognutz]

Previous poster intimated that TCU is now better than lots of NCAA teams. Not true. Probably not better than any of them. But maybe - MAYBE - Tcu might be better than just 1 or 2.

That isn't even worth making a post about. I said if Tcu wins the NIT they are the 65th best team in the country. The poster disagreeing with me says _ "NO THAT AINT RIGHT, TCU MIGHT BE THE 63rd BEST"

Really ? And that is worth telling me that I am wrong by calling Tcu the 65th best ?

OK you win.....if TCU wins the NIT I will admit they are the 63rd best.

Geeeeezz !! What a beating some of you dense ones are !! Wow. You really want to argue that ?

Just pointing out that calling someone's opinion "utterly ridiculous" is pretty strong especially when you concede that they may in fact be correct.

 

[BABYFACE]

Wyoming Frog =

 

[TooColdU]

Previous poster intimated that TCU is now better than lots of NCAA teams. Not true. Probably not better than any of them. But maybe - MAYBE - Tcu might be better than just 1 or 2.

That isn't even worth making a post about. I said if Tcu wins the NIT they are the 65th best team in the country. The poster disagreeing with me says _ "NO THAT AINT RIGHT, TCU MIGHT BE THE 63rd BEST"

Really ? And that is worth telling me that I am wrong by calling Tcu the 65th best ?

OK you win.....if TCU wins the NIT I will admit they are the 63rd best.

Geeeeezz !! What a beating some of you dense ones are !! Wow. You really want to argue that ?