Toggle sidebar

If we can beat Creighton, lots of eyeballs on RU this Saturday

S

Shelby65

All-Conference
Apr 1, 2008
8,342
4,644
66
MADHAT1 said:
I wouldn't be surprised to hear Creighton wasn't a top choice either, but both programs got the invite and
it doesn't matter if either are not first choice schools, they're in.
Rutgers winning their game against Creighton should be our only concern.
Go RU
Click to expand...
A concern ? Like whether catfish or sturgeon are faster ? And are geologists are rounding up or rounding down in the Mt. Everest is ‘growing 2mm a year’ calculation ?

Of these three questions, whether or not RU beats Creighton is the least significant.
 
Last edited:
K

King of S

All-Conference
Sep 20, 2017
3,396
2,746
113
To note, there will be 10,000 fans tonight at Hinkle Fieldhouse for the NIT semifinals because Illinois St. is playing. They love their Redbirds out there.
 
  • Like
Reactions: bac2therac
PiscatawayMike

PiscatawayMike

Heisman
Jul 27, 2001
17,322
15,155
113
29PAS said:
Do you remember if the Georgetown Senior Night loss was when Rashod Kent fouled out? His senior night fouling out quote still cracks me up after all these years.
Click to expand...
I don't think so, but he might have in the final half-minute. This game story mentions he was on the court with 28 seconds remaining.

https://nypost.com/1999/02/24/knightmare-continues/

If Kent fouled out during his Senior Night, that would have been vs. Seton Hall in 2002. RU won, 66-60.
 
  • Like
Reactions: tru2ru1 and 29PAS
P

PSAL_Hoops

Heisman
Feb 18, 2008
13,080
12,421
78
bac2therac said:
Auburn is relevant because they were the controversial bubble school that beat Florida and 6 other ncaa schools....this argument is liking arguing who the tallest midget is...no one really cares about these tourneys. Auburn hoops is a way better brand than Rutgers and Creighton combined and a late start on the east coast isnt going to have people burning the midnight oil


as for Rutgers anyone not affiliated with Rutgers is looking and laughing at just how we got to the point where 14-19 schools are in post season..thats the opinion of rutgers
Click to expand...

You keep missing the point. If you don’t make the NCAAs, that’s not what these post season games are about anymore. The idea of the Crown is to create a short, fun, low pressure tournament that players actually want to participate in. The timing / location is good while FF is going on because it provides additional supplemental content for casual tune in viewing. Similar to the bowl games. That’s all this is. That - with a couple media story lines articles blasted around to try to generate interest.

In terms of the NIT - perhaps you still have a vision of what a next tier tournament “should be”, but rest assured the NIT is no longer “that”. Auburn’s path to the NIT “finals” was - NET 187, 122, 70 and now 95. Meanwhile - the teams RU could face in the Crown - NET 48, 50, 59, 61, 76, 81 and 83. Most of the better teams are choosing to play there instead because any player in their right mind would pick the Crown if given the choice.

And no, I don’t think Auburn with their pretty net of 38 on their own brings any special interest coverage to the NIT. Their early season success wasn’t enough to get them in the NCAAs and they closed out the season from Feb on going 3 of 8. That stinks. I highly doubt anyone is any more excited about watching them play than any team in the Crown (not that there is excitement for any of the games but the field over all is way better for the Crown - it’s not even close). And oh yeah - rhey pulled out an OT win over Bethune Cookman. If they lose that one their NET would’ve looked way worse and they’d have finished with a losing record.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Wagram97
S

Shelby65

All-Conference
Apr 1, 2008
8,342
4,644
66
PiscatawayMike said:
I don't think so, but he might have in the final half-minute. This game story mentions he was on the court with 28 seconds remaining.

https://nypost.com/1999/02/24/knightmare-continues/

If Kent fouled out during his Senior Night, that would have been vs. Seton Hall in 2002. RU won, 66-60.
Click to expand...
PMike’s Rutgers recall is astounding. He even remembers what will happen in the future. A real life Marty McFly.
 
  • Haha
  • Like
Reactions: PiscatawayMike and 29PAS
bac2therac

bac2therac

Hall of Famer
Jul 30, 2001
247,212
176,876
113
PSAL_Hoops said:
You keep missing the point. If you don’t make the NCAAs, that’s not what these post season games are about anymore. The idea of the Crown is to create a short, fun, low pressure tournament that players actually want to participate in. The timing / location is good while FF is going on because it provides additional supplemental content for casual tune in viewing. Similar to the bowl games. That’s all this is. That - with a couple media story lines articles blasted around to try to generate interest.

In terms of the NIT - perhaps you still have a vision of what a next tier tournament “should be”, but rest assured the NIT is no longer “that”. Auburn’s path to the NIT “finals” was - NET 187, 122, 70 and now 95. Meanwhile - the teams RU could face in the Crown - NET 48, 50, 59, 61, 76, 81 and 83. Most of the better teams are choosing to play there instead because any player in their right mind would pick the Crown if given the choice.

And no, I don’t think Auburn with their pretty net of 38 on their own brings any special interest coverage to the NIT. Their early season success wasn’t enough to get them in the NCAAs and they closed out the season from Feb on going 3 of 8. That stinks. I highly doubt anyone is any more excited about watching them play than any team in the Crown (not that there is excitement for any of the games but the field over all is way better for the Crown - it’s not even close). And oh yeah - rhey pulled out an OT win over Bethune Cookman. If they lose that one their NET would’ve looked way worse and they’d have finished with a losing record.
Click to expand...
Crown was a deal with the big east big 10 and big 12 the primary schools. Late in the process they had to scramble to abandon selection principles because its likely that feelers showed most schools were not interested
 
29PAS

29PAS

All-Conference
Sep 21, 2001
3,411
1,389
113
PiscatawayMike said:
I don't think so, but he might have in the final half-minute. This game story mentions he was on the court with 28 seconds remaining.

https://nypost.com/1999/02/24/knightmare-continues/

If Kent fouled out during his Senior Night, that would have been vs. Seton Hall in 2002. RU won, 66-60.
Click to expand...
That was it because it was HIS senior night. The quote pretty much was, with a big smile on his face, "I can't believe they fouled me out on Senior Night?"
 
  • Like
Reactions: PiscatawayMike
Sweet Pea's Corner

Sweet Pea's Corner

All-American
Sep 10, 2001
17,821
5,676
113
bac2therac said:
Crown was a deal with the big east big 10 and big 12 the primary schools. Late in the process they had to scramble to abandon selection principles because its likely that feelers showed most schools were not interested
Click to expand...
Guess you won't welcome the team back home with the Crown.
 
P

PSAL_Hoops

Heisman
Feb 18, 2008
13,080
12,421
78
bac2therac said:
Crown was a deal with the big east big 10 and big 12 the primary schools. Late in the process they had to scramble to abandon selection principles because its likely that feelers showed most schools were not interested
Click to expand...

Not exactly… more like the NIT was not only the one doing the “scrambling” but ended up looking ridiculous with their convoluted KNIT formula in getting embarrassed when teams that turned down the opportunity to be feature 1 seeds (mathematically via their own KNIT concoction), accepted bids to participate in the Crown.

The so called “scrambling” your referring to for the Crown bracket led to the additions of Oklahoma and Stanford who would’ve been top seeds if they had accepted bids for the NIT. In reality - the Crown formula always called for 2 at large bids and those were the 2 teams selected.

The reality is - whether a team is interested in continuing on after not making the NCAAs is going to be largely based on the mindframe of the players on the team (how the season went down the stretch, injuries, guys ready to move on to pro ball, etc.). That said - it’s clear as day the Crown is far more desirable than the NIT. There’s not one team in the NIT bracket that could’ve reasonably expected to get a Crown bid but chose to play in the NIT, except maybe Auburn and even in their case, that wasn’t a guarantee. Oklahoma is a more prominent brand and Stanford has the proximity to Vegas probably making them a more desirable choice. Auburn would’ve had no way of knowing if the Crown would’ve had a spot for them.
 
bac2therac

bac2therac

Hall of Famer
Jul 30, 2001
247,212
176,876
113
PSAL_Hoops said:
Not exactly… more like the NIT was not only the one doing the “scrambling” but ended up looking ridiculous with their convoluted KNIT formula in getting embarrassed when teams that turned down the opportunity to be feature 1 seeds (mathematically via their own KNIT concoction), accepted bids to participate in the Crown.

The so called “scrambling” your referring to for the Crown bracket led to the additions of Oklahoma and Stanford who would’ve been top seeds if they had accepted bids for the NIT. In reality - the Crown formula always called for 2 at large bids and those were the 2 teams selected.

The reality is - whether a team is interested in continuing on after not making the NCAAs is going to be largely based on the mindframe of the players on the team (how the season went down the stretch, injuries, guys ready to move on to pro ball, etc.). That said - it’s clear as day the Crown is far more desirable than the NIT. There’s not one team in the NIT bracket that could’ve reasonably expected to get a Crown bid but chose to play in the NIT, except maybe Auburn and even in their case, that wasn’t a guarantee. Oklahoma is a more prominent brand and Stanford has the proximity to Vegas probably making them a more desirable choice. Auburn would’ve had no way of knowing if the Crown would’ve had a spot for them.
Click to expand...
It was likely worked out wellbefore selection sunday which schools were interested

Crown abandoning its rules shows there was a major issue
 
LeapinLou

LeapinLou

All-American
Jul 24, 2001
13,142
6,759
113
Bob Chaewsky_rivals said:
You won't stay up to 11 to watch the game? What are you like 8 years old? I'm having dinner at 10 - LOL.
Click to expand...
Here's the problem. The game will start at 10:30. It will end at 12:40 AM. If we lose a heartbreaker, that will keep me up another 2 hours. So my option is to fall asleep at 10 PM and watch the game in the morning or see it live and potentially end up with only 3 hours of sleep.

To each his own, but this is not a difficult decision for me.
 
Last edited:
P

PSAL_Hoops

Heisman
Feb 18, 2008
13,080
12,421
78
bac2therac said:
It was likely worked out wellbefore selection sunday which schools were interested

Crown abandoning its rules shows there was a major issue
Click to expand...

What “rule” exactly did the Crown abandon? They were always set to schedule 2 at large teams without regard to conference affiliation. They picked Oklahoma and Stanford who both would’ve been 1 seeds in the NIT if they were interested in playing there. Do you dispute this point?

Two teams from the B12 were selected and played in the Crown. Baylor and WVU (both in the NET top 60) were selected for and played in the Crown. For many reasons discusses, not every team is going to elect to play in a consolation post season. Cincy and UCF opted out but so what? There were plenty of B12 teams to choose from and more clearly interested as Colorado was added after too.

In terms of the BIG, Pike made an open campaign basically after the UCLA loss to make it known he was interested “I wish we could keep playing…” Minnesota lost the day before so their interest would’ve been known already. Again - there was no so called scramble there either. We weren’t first choice but there was never a panic run to field 2 BIG teams either.

So what are you talking about then - the trashy BE? The stated rule was they had to ask 2 teams. Surely they did at least that. Probably asked more who declined, but so what? They picked up Colorado instead who is clearly better than the bottom part of the BE anyway. Zero BE and BIG teams played in the NIT. Oklahoma St the only B12 team. The NIT field is pathetic.
 
bac2therac

bac2therac

Hall of Famer
Jul 30, 2001
247,212
176,876
113
PSAL_Hoops said:
What “rule” exactly did the Crown abandon? They were always set to schedule 2 at large teams without regard to conference affiliation. They picked Oklahoma and Stanford who both would’ve been 1 seeds in the NIT if they were interested in playing there. Do you dispute this point?

Two teams from the B12 were selected and played in the Crown. Baylor and WVU (both in the NET top 60) were selected for and played in the Crown. For many reasons discusses, not every team is going to elect to play in a consolation post season. Cincy and UCF opted out but so what? There were plenty of B12 teams to choose from and more clearly interested as Colorado was added after too.

In terms of the BIG, Pike made an open campaign basically after the UCLA loss to make it known he was interested “I wish we could keep playing…” Minnesota lost the day before so their interest would’ve been known already. Again - there was no so called scramble there either. We weren’t first choice but there was never a panic run to field 2 BIG teams either.

So what are you talking about then - the trashy BE? The stated rule was they had to ask 2 teams. Surely they did at least that. Probably asked more who declined, but so what? They picked up Colorado instead who is clearly better than the bottom part of the BE anyway. Zero BE and BIG teams played in the NIT. Oklahoma St the only B12 team. The NIT field is pathetic.
Click to expand...
because they didnt stick to 2 big east, 2 big 12, 2 big 10...and cutting from16 to 8 last year after people raved it was the tourney of the future says alot..the attendance is embarrassing and the idea of 18-16 schools getting money for winning a tourney of mediocrity is laughable

they literally had to add an extra big 12 school because either all the big east schools declined or they abandoned their principles

its likely Oklahoma declined a nit bid knowing the crown bid was coming.

the nit field isnt actually pathetic...alot of smaller schools and mid majors and people like that and wins at that level mean something rather than sub 500 and slight above 500 schools playing in the Crown. Id rather watch them, and wait til you see the atmosphere at Hinkle tonight and compare it to the ****** empty arena where the announcers try to keep you from falling asleep. Creighton has to be the worst Creighton team in over a decade
 
  • Like
Reactions: King of S
P

PSAL_Hoops

Heisman
Feb 18, 2008
13,080
12,421
78
bac2therac said:
because they didnt stick to 2 big east, 2 big 12, 2 big 10...and cutting from16 to 8 last year after people raved it was the tourney of the future says alot..the attendance is embarrassing and the idea of 18-16 schools getting money for winning a tourney of mediocrity is laughable

they literally had to add an extra big 12 school because either all the big east schools declined or they abandoned their principles

its likely Oklahoma declined a nit bid knowing the crown bid was coming.

the nit field isnt actually pathetic...alot of smaller schools and mid majors and people like that and wins at that level mean something rather than sub 500 and slight above 500 schools playing in the Crown. Id rather watch them, and wait til you see the atmosphere at Hinkle tonight and compare it to the ****** empty arena where the announcers try to keep you from falling asleep. Creighton has to be the worst Creighton team in over a decade
Click to expand...

The point is that Oklahoma and Stanford declined the NIT because they preferred to play in the Crown (25% of the field directly passed over the NIT). Oklahoma was the first team out of the field. This point demonstrates that the Crown is the more desirable invitation of the 2. The move down to 8 teams was the right call because the first round games against mid-majors types probably just don’t draw. Just like the pummeling UIC (middle of the pack 16 loss team) took to Cal likely didn’t draw. For some reason, you seem to think being 19-16 with several wins over D2 schools makes a mid-major team more desirable to watch in a consolation tournament than 14-16 win high major teams that finished the season better than they started. I don’t think the the ratings well ultimately support your preference. I think the NIT model is dead. I guess we’ll see.

You might personally prefer to watch mid-majors but the NIT tournament has basically become the CBI.
 
bac2therac

bac2therac

Hall of Famer
Jul 30, 2001
247,212
176,876
113
PSAL_Hoops said:
The point is that Oklahoma and Stanford declined the NIT because they preferred to play in the Crown (25% of the field directly passed over the NIT). Oklahoma was the first team out of the field. This point demonstrates that the Crown is the more desirable invitation of the 2. The move down to 8 teams was the right call because the first round games against mid-majors types probably just don’t draw. Just like the pummeling UIC (middle of the pack 16 loss team) took to Cal likely didn’t draw. For some reason, you seem to think being 19-16 with several wins over D2 schools makes a mid-major team more desirable to watch in a consolation tournament than 14-16 win high major teams that finished the season better than they started. I don’t think the the ratings well ultimately support your preference. I think the NIT model is dead. I guess we’ll see.

You might personally prefer to watch mid-majors but the NIT tournament has basically become the CBI.
Click to expand...
we actually have no idea what happened.....remember 6 slots were taken by the 3 conferences contract. Only 2 at larges so its likely this was done behind the scenes as Stanford would have taken a nit bid if they knew the crown didnt want them. they ended up having to scramble for a 3rd at large as the entire big east was balking

basically alot of schools dont give a **** about either tourney and thats why Indiana passed and other schools like SHU were banged up or wouldnt have enough players....yes scraping for Rutgers at 14-19 to fill out the field says alot about desirability

cbi..lets compare atmosphere and attendance tonight
 
P

PSAL_Hoops

Heisman
Feb 18, 2008
13,080
12,421
78
bac2therac said:
we actually have no idea what happened.....remember 6 slots were taken by the 3 conferences contract. Only 2 at larges so its likely this was done behind the scenes as Stanford would have taken a nit bid if they knew the crown didnt want them. they ended up having to scramble for a 3rd at large as the entire big east was balking

basically alot of schools dont give a **** about either tourney and thats why Indiana passed and other schools like SHU were banged up or wouldnt have enough players....yes scraping for Rutgers at 14-19 to fill out the field says alot about desirability

cbi..lets compare atmosphere and attendance tonight
Click to expand...

You can’t “compare” that. One is a final four game (and also starts an hour earlier EST) while the other is round of 8. I bet last night’s Oklahoma game had better viewership ratings than any of the quarter final NIT games. And that’s the game that contains your “scrambler addition”.

And yes, it’s true. We have no idea what officially happened with the BE teams but what’s the difference? It worked out. I’m sure the Crown had no interest in Depaul. They were in the field last year, apathetic, small fan base / enrollment, closed out season on 3 game losing streak, etc. im sure they were happy to plug Colorado (who took Oklahoma to OT) in place of them. There was no scramble involved in finding a team (scrambling entails situations like with the bowl games getting canceled because teams can’t get lined up, for instance). That wasn’t even close to being the case. As you indicated - 6 of the 8 teams were sourced from the contractual tie in conferences - and the 2 that were not were true bubble teams that were close to making the field.

I’ll add - the Crown likely scaled down to 8, because it didn’t want to have to consider mid-majors who weren’t even close to the bubble because those are usually the games that draw the least interest. Teams like UIC (17-16 against D1 in the MVC) or UNLV (17-16 MWC) in the NIT.
 
Last edited:
bac2therac

bac2therac

Hall of Famer
Jul 30, 2001
247,212
176,876
113
PSAL_Hoops said:
You can’t “compare” that. One is a final four game (and also starts an hour earlier EST) while the other is round of 8. I bet last night’s Oklahoma game had better viewership ratings than any of the quarter final NIT games. And that’s the game that contains your “scrambler addition”.

And yes, it’s true. We have no idea what officially happened with the BE teams but what’s the difference? It worked out. I’m sure the Crown had no interest in Depaul. They were in the field last year, apathetic, small fan base / enrollment, closed out season on 3 game losing streak, etc. im sure they were happy to plug Colorado (who took Oklahoma to OT) in place of them. There was no scramble involved in finding a team (scrambling entails situations like with the bowl games getting canceled because teams can’t get lined up, for instance). That wasn’t even close to being the case. As you indicated - 6 of the 8 teams were sourced from the contractual tie in conferences - and the 2 that were not were true bubble teams that were close to making the field.

I’ll add - the Crown likely scaled down to 8, because it didn’t want to have to consider mid-majors who weren’t even close to the bubble because those are usually the games that draw the least interest. Teams like UIC (17-16 against D1 in the MVC) or UNLV (17-16 MWC) in the NIT.
Click to expand...
Because the feelers were put out well in advance. Dont expect your Saturday attendence will be so hot either
 
P

PSAL_Hoops

Heisman
Feb 18, 2008
13,080
12,421
78
bac2therac said:
Because the feelers were put out well in advance. Dont expect your Saturday attendence will be so hot either
Click to expand...

Right of course. Feelers were likely put out and it would’ve been known early that plenty of B12 teams (and teams from other high major conferences) were interested in continuing to play. So there was never a concern with not fielding a bracket or having to resort to inviting mid-majors (which is what they were looking to move away from).

The agreement was an autobid for the 2 best NETs fro the 3 conferences contracted. Nothing was publicly stated resembling how selection would be handled if those teams declined (everyone just assumed they would go down the line like the bowl tie ins usually do, but that was never stated outright - and even with the bowls sometimes exceptions are made). The Crown almost certainly did not want DePaul in their field of 8 after they got blown out in the round of 16 last year.

Physical attendance at these events is not relevant (to the viability of the tournament). It’s all about the TV viewership which is not correlated with how many are in the stands. Last year the Crown did better viewership than the NIT across the board. That’s how the tournament makes money. Not physical ticket sales.
 
Last edited:
bac2therac

bac2therac

Hall of Famer
Jul 30, 2001
247,212
176,876
113
PSAL_Hoops said:
Right of course. Feelers were likely put out and it would’ve been known early that plenty of B12 teams (and teams from other high major conferences) were interested in continuing to play. So there was never a concern with not fielding a bracket or having to resort to inviting mid-majors (which is what they were looking to move away from).

The agreement was an autobid for the 2 best NETs fro the 3 conferences contracted. Nothing was publicly stated resembling how selection would be handled if those teams declined (everyone just assumed they would go down the line like the bowl tie ins usually do, but that was never stated outright - and even with the bowls sometimes exceptions are made). The Crown almost certainly did not want DePaul in their field of 8 after they got blown out in the round of 16 last year.

Physical attendance at these events is not relevant (to the viability of the tournament). It’s all about the TV viewership which is not correlated with how many are in the stands. Last year the Crown did better viewership than the NIT across the board. That’s how the tournament makes money. Not physical ticket sales.
Click to expand...
they only had to find 8 schools...having to dip for 130 or whatever rutgers is reaching at the bottom feeding end

i dont think they have an opinion of what schools they take..they took a trash de paul last year that finished 14-19 and they are doing the same with Rutgers at 14-19. You are actually proving my point. Crown isnt doing comparative scores..lmfao come on
 
  • Like
Reactions: batts
P

PSAL_Hoops

Heisman
Feb 18, 2008
13,080
12,421
78
bac2therac said:
they only had to find 8 schools...having to dip for 130 or whatever rutgers is reaching at the bottom feeding end

i dont think they have an opinion of what schools they take..they took a trash de paul last year that finished 14-19 and they are doing the same with Rutgers at 14-19. You are actually proving my point. Crown isnt doing comparative scores..lmfao come on
Click to expand...

They don’t really care what any team is “rated”. That’s the point you keep missing. They want to make money, and the tournament (outside of the first round which was strategically eliminated) achieved that goal which basically means pulling in a respectable number of TV viewers to generate advertising revenues for the next year in repeating the event. That’s their goal and nothing else.

There’s some correlation to success, but it’s mostly related to the morale of the fan base following that particular team and their predicted appetite to follow their team in a consolation tournament. Don’t compare DePaul (40% our enrollment and notoriously way more apathetic to sport in general) to Rutgers. In every conceivable instance outside of Eddie Jordan darkness, Rutgers projects to draw more TV eyeball viewer than them in an apples to apples match up (same opponent desirability for viewership). It’s not about the 130. We may not be Duke, but we’ll always have Rutgers fans who will watch.
 
bac2therac

bac2therac

Hall of Famer
Jul 30, 2001
247,212
176,876
113
PSAL_Hoops said:
They don’t really care what any team is “rated”. That’s the point you keep missing. They want to make money, and the tournament (outside of the first round which was strategically eliminated) achieved that goal which basically means pulling in a respectable number of TV viewers to generate advertising revenues for the next year in repeating the event. That’s their goal and nothing else.

There’s some correlation to success, but it’s mostly related to the morale of the fan base following that particular team and their predicted appetite to follow their team in a consolation tournament. Don’t compare DePaul (40% our enrollment and notoriously way more apathetic to sport in general) to Rutgers. In every conceivable instance outside of Eddie Jordan darkness, Rutgers projects to draw more TV eyeball viewer than them in an apples to apples match up (same opponent desirability for viewership). It’s not about the 130. We may not be Duke, but we’ll always have Rutgers fans who will watch.
Click to expand...
They arent making more money by taking Rutgers over Depaul

Now you are arguing against your argument

Its content..people will watch anything and they will watch 2 sub 500 schools tonight
 
  • Like
Reactions: batts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom