rlh04d wrote:valleychamp wrote:That's asinine. Anything in the NCAA's >>>> Anything in the NIT. Its no contest.
Nope, it's not a contest at all. Winning the NIT is far, far better than a one-and-done in the NCAA tournament.
WSU's 2010-11 postseason was better than their 2011-12 postseason. No question.
I wonder in the future when talking about WSU or Marshall's resume, how many sports writers will write "won the NIT in 2011" or "lost in the first round of the 2012 NCAA tournament" ?
Congratulations for the dumbest post in the history of this board. When writing about WSU or Marshall, the first thing people will talk about is how many NCAA tournaments the school/coach went to. NIT appearances, if mentioned at all, will come after NCAA tournament appearances, conference titles and conference tourney titles.
The NIT is NEVER better than the NCAA tourney in today's world. NEVER. When people talk about schools, they ask how many NCAA tournaments have you made and how far did you get. If someone mentions the NIT, the conversation abruptly ends. Nobody asks, "how far did you make it in the NIT?" because ultimately it just means you didn't make the NCAA tournament. The same is true for the CIT, CBI, etc.
NIT, CBI and CIT titles only matter to the schools that won them. Nobody else cares.