I still can't believe they didn't get in. They are in the NIT FF and doing it with relative ease. They should run up the score if given the chance to show they deserved to get into the NCAA tournament. They should have been a 7 or 10 seed, could have gotten into the Sweet 16 with the right matchup. The Committee fails again.
I can't believe Temple didn't get in
- Thread starter Scoe
- Start date
- Status
- Joined
- Dec 24, 2013
- Messages
- 36
- Reaction Score
- 38
Team got jammed by the committee. They are playing with real confidence right now. All the parts are working well together. This is how they needed to play against SMU
CTBasketball
Former Owner of the Pizza Thread
- Joined
- Aug 27, 2012
- Messages
- 9,725
- Reaction Score
- 31,744
I can't believe CTBasketball got ejected in intramural basketball tonight.
Blowing out KU on their own home court wasn't enough I guess, SMU-Temple was the defacto AAC title game.
I wouldn't have a laptop if that were us.
storrsroars
Exiled in Pittsburgh
- Joined
- Mar 23, 2012
- Messages
- 19,961
- Reaction Score
- 39,789
Yeah, they got ripped off. Unfortunately UCLA going to the SS gives the selection committee a "See, we told you so," chip.
On a side note, too bad that ODU/Murray St. game wasn't in the NCAAs. The ending would've been an instant classic and in tourney highlight shows for years to come. As it was just an NIT final 8 game, it'll be forgotten by tomorrow.
On a side note, too bad that ODU/Murray St. game wasn't in the NCAAs. The ending would've been an instant classic and in tourney highlight shows for years to come. As it was just an NIT final 8 game, it'll be forgotten by tomorrow.
UCweCONN
Former Poster
- Joined
- Aug 26, 2011
- Messages
- 3,875
- Reaction Score
- 6,610
Winning the NIT does not validate a team's claim that they should've made the NCAA tournament because in winning the NIT Tournament you have to beat other teams that didn't make the tourney (and some on Temple's own home court). Apples and oranges. That's like saying a high seed that lost early in the NCAA Tourney showed that they didn't belong. Good for Temple, but the best that will come of this is the players will feel a bit better about their season and the returning players got post-season experience that should help them next year.
The 64 best teams are never in the big dance, Every league get its champion in to the tourney and plus the committee has its favorite leagues.
So, this leaves a dozen or so worthy teams for the NIT. Winning the NIT is probably the equivalent of making the Sweet 16. It is much harder for any team to win the NIT than it is for the tops seeds in the NCAA to make it to the Sweet 16.
- Joined
- Aug 25, 2011
- Messages
- 16,513
- Reaction Score
- 31,987
So your logic says that Temple couldn't have beaten Hampton? As pnow said the top 64 teams aren't in the Tourney.
In respect to a strong NIT performance it can validate a season for a team that was screwed. What the hell else can they do complain, bitch and moan to no good? You may disagree but at this time I'd rather be a senior winning my last game in a Tourney (with a Trophy) than in my dorm reminiscing about the fun I had and what could have been. There is no tomorrow for many of them playing in the NIT and they are on TV and playing for their family/school one last time.
We've been fortunate and new/young fans spoiled, but some fans here can still relate to 'old' NIT days and understand that it is the 'next best thing'.
- Joined
- May 7, 2014
- Messages
- 14,517
- Reaction Score
- 30,047
Can't you?
This is pretty much what happened last year to SMU. Unfortunately, besides UConn, no AAC team has demonstrated in the tournament that the conference should be considered along with the P5. So until that changes, we are going to be getting MWC-level treatment: conference champion and 1, maybe 2 at-large.
joober jones
Finally Non-Fat Guy
- Joined
- Nov 2, 2011
- Messages
- 4,737
- Reaction Score
- 9,662
"Who's going to go all the way in '88? The Temple Owls, that's who!" - commercial on a VHS tape recorded when my then-11-year-old wife was watching the Wizard of Oz.
- Joined
- Dec 13, 2012
- Messages
- 482
- Reaction Score
- 838
Temple was ranked #1 going into the tournament in 1988. John Chaney made the Elite 8 five times, but never reached the Final 4. He had the misfortune of never being aided by upsets that might have eased his path. He faced Michigan (Fab 5), Michigan St., North Carolina, and Duke twice. All were number 1 seeds except Duke in 1988, who was seeded second (Temple was the 1 seed).
joober jones
Finally Non-Fat Guy
- Joined
- Nov 2, 2011
- Messages
- 4,737
- Reaction Score
- 9,662
I wasn't yet in the USA at that point (came here at the end of '88) so I'm not too familiar with their teams of those days. For some reason that line always just stuck in my head.
- Joined
- Dec 13, 2012
- Messages
- 482
- Reaction Score
- 838
Temple was very good from 1988, to 2001. Pretty much the equivalent of a Big East team playing in the A10. UMass as well, during most of that same period. temple dropped off after 2001, as age began to slow Chaney down. Once Dunphy took over, it took him a few years to right the ship, but other than last year, Temple's been pretty solid the last 5-6 years. However, Dunphy hasn't had nearly the success in the postseason that Chaney did. Overall though, I think that Temple is a plus for the AAC going forward. Would have loved for it to have happened 20 years ago though. Chaney vs Calhoun would have been insane. Temple may have become UConn's archrival had they been in the BE back then.
7 or 10 but not 8 or 9?
August_West
Universal remote, put it down on docking station.
- Joined
- Aug 29, 2011
- Messages
- 51,294
- Reaction Score
- 88,843
donyell34 said:
Larry Brown should've worried about beating an 11 seed instead of the tournament committee if he wants to do right by the AAC.
- Status