USC PLAYERS choosing not to play in NIT?!

[MerrittsMustache]

As a scout, I'd be unimpressed, not because I wouldn't have one more chance to see the guy play, but because it tells me something about his character. That he's willing to put himself before his team.

Scouts don't care about that. If the kid can play, the kid can play.

[GGGG]

Scouts don't care about that. If the kid can play, the kid can play.

Yep. In no way is that a character flaw. 

[Nukem2]

Yep. In no way is that a character flaw.

Well, in a very real way, they are being selfish....?

[mug644]

Scouts don't care about that. If the kid can play, the kid can play.

Accepted. I've never been a scout, but have been a teammate many, many times. My opinion is obviously based on my own experience and how I would approach the situation. I would be very turned off if a teammate walked out on the team like that.

But, as stated above, different perspectives can be equally valid.

[Mr. Sand-Knit]

Agree that its a flaw but i think when NBA gms are evaluating talented young men not all character flaws are treated the same.  I think we can all think of a ton of professional prospects that had made much poorer choices that deemed acceptable enough to take a chance ...

[CTWarrior]

Others have said it but it's an important point: the logic above relies on the premise that a school's intent in offering a scholarship to a top player is to provide an education. But of course it isn't. Schools offer scholarships because that player can play basketball really, really well. So well, in fact, that people will come and pay money to see the team play, and networks will pay money to watch them on TV, etc. The program will (ideally) succeed because of that player. And the player gets exposure as a result. It's a business arrangement on both sides. Perhaps this USC kid should honor a commitment to his teammates - a decision that we, tapping away on our phones in random cities, have no real input on.

But commitment to the school has nothing to do with it.

A useful degree is available if you want it and are capable of attaining it.  If you choose not to get it because you are going to play in the NBA, that is your business, but you should still honor your commitment to the school and the team.  I don't really care if the school is making money.  They are still preparing you for your career just like they do accountants and doctors.  You should hold up your end of the bargain.  I agree wholeheartedly that my opinion is irrelevant.

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

If I was a teammate, I would be pissed. Maybe that makes me selfish. I don't think so, but that's my opinion, not a statement of fact. The NIT may not mean much to the NBA draft pick but it could mean a whole hell of a lot to the team.

I understand it more for football because of the nature of the game. Risk of injury is much higher. I'd also understand a player like Greg or Sam who has been playing injured taking off to heal.

[BallBoy]

As MU82 pointed out earlier, the exact same things were said of Leonard Fournette and Christian McCaffery when they skipped out on bowl games. It didn't hurt them at all.

Two very different sports and process:
1.  College Football players have to play three years so scouts have a longer time to evaluate.  I know in the case of USC, they are all upper classman but that is also a knock in basketball.  They know your potential.
2.  Both of those stated players, previously played in high major bowls
3.  The NBA draft is 2 rounds and the NFL draft is 7 rounds.  There are only 60 picks so a lot of competition.
4.  2nd Round on NBA draft is not big time guaranteed money.  As a scout, i would be asking should a take an upper classman who decided not to play or a one and done player with potential.  Look at the number of NFL players who dropped significantly in the NFL draft because they smoked weed or had their twitter hacked.  That is millions of dollars.
5.  Chance of significant injury in basketball is way lower.  As Fournette and McCaffery proved themselves, it transitioned to injury prevention.  I don't see anyone on USC that has proved themselves.
6.  You don't make impressive money in either Europe or D-League.  Here is an article (a little dated) that shows your earning potential is limited.
http://sportsagentblog.com/2012/07/30/nba-d-league-vs-european-basketball-why-dont-more-players-go-to-europe/

Really this is about Chimezie and in most drafts he is currently a late first rounder.  That doesn't account for all early entrants, those who make a big run and those from Europe.  If he drops 1-6 spots he is in the second round and lost his big guaranteed money and the value drops greatly.
https://hypebeast.com/2017/6/nba-draft-contract-values-first-second-round-drop

[GGGG]

Well, in a very real way, they are being selfish....?

Being selfish and protecting your interests can be a fine line.

[Loose Cannon]

Difficult situation, but time will reveal your Character.  It's up to us to interrupt that.   To me it comes down to are you a Teammate or Not.

[StateStreetMission]

Just an idea - Please don't shoot the messenger !

What if the Power 7 (?) conferences were not eligible for the NIT.  Earn an NCAA bid or bust.
Invite only teams from the lesser conferences that have very good records to the NIT.
There are enough teams with excellent records that play in the one bid conferences and some in the mid Majors that would relish the thought of playing in a post season tournament.



 

[brewcity77]

Just an idea - Please don't shoot the messenger !

What if the Power 7 (?) conferences were not eligible for the NIT.  Earn an NCAA bid or bust.
Invite only teams from the lesser conferences that have very good records to the NIT.
There are enough teams with excellent records that play in the one bid conferences and some in the mid Majors that would relish the thought of playing in a post season tournament

Don't like it. They have the CBI and CIT for that.

[Nukem2]

Being selfish and protecting your interests can be a fine line.

We all risk our lives every day.  At times one has to live the life and enjoy things.  Some folks lose sight of that.

[CTWarrior]

Just an idea - Please don't shoot the messenger !

What if the Power 7 (?) conferences were not eligible for the NIT.  Earn an NCAA bid or bust.
Invite only teams from the lesser conferences that have very good records to the NIT.
There are enough teams with excellent records that play in the one bid conferences and some in the mid Majors that would relish the thought of playing in a post season tournament.

Not a bad idea, if you ask me.  Seems to me the non-majors have the deck stacked against them when it comes to the NCAA, given the challenges scheduling and all.

ButI think in the end this idea would be doomed to failure because conferences would want to be designated as power conferences.  Besides the power 5 football conferences, the Big East (obviously), the AAC and the Atlantic 10 would definitely have a problem being lumped into the non-power conferences.  I think there would be several others that would balk at being identified officially as a non-power conference (the MAC, the WCC, maybe the Mountain West)

[BallBoy]

Just an idea - Please don't shoot the messenger !

What if the Power 7 (?) conferences were not eligible for the NIT.  Earn an NCAA bid or bust.
Invite only teams from the lesser conferences that have very good records to the NIT.
There are enough teams with excellent records that play in the one bid conferences and some in the mid Majors that would relish the thought of playing in a post season tournament.



 

Not a huge fan.  I would prefer the 64 best teams in the NCAA regardless of conference affiliation and the next best 32 for the NIT. 

If I were to change it I would put more importance on the Conference Tournament and say only the winner gets into the NCAA tournament.  They then battle it out for who is the best team.  Then have the runner-up or regular season champion play in the NIT.  If you want to expand the tournament then you could have the top 4 teams from each conference play.  Very similar model to European soccer.   

I like that approach better because:
1.  It breaks up the need for conference affiliation. Having a monster conference like the current ACC and Big Ten is actually a detriment to your chances of making the tournament
2.  It removes the subjectivity of the selection process
3.  The conference tournament has more importance overall.

[GGGG]

Not a huge fan.  I would prefer the 64 best teams in the NCAA regardless of conference affiliation and the next best 32 for the NIT. 

If I were to change it I would put more importance on the Conference Tournament and say only the winner gets into the NCAA tournament.  They then battle it out for who is the best team.  Then have the runner-up or regular season champion play in the NIT.  If you want to expand the tournament then you could have the top 4 teams from each conference play.  Very similar model to European soccer.   

I like that approach better because:
1.  It breaks up the need for conference affiliation. Having a monster conference like the current ACC and Big Ten is actually a detriment to your chances of making the tournament
2.  It removes the subjectivity of the selection process
3.  The conference tournament has more importance overall.

How is this similar to the European soccer model?  Right now, the top four European leagues get four guaranteed places in the Champions League group stages.

If anything, European soccer has become more like the NCAAs.  Reason?  Eyeballs.

[GooooMarquette]

We all risk our lives every day.  At times one has to live the life and enjoy things.  Some folks lose sight of that.

Yep. If the USC players are not playing to protect their interests, they should also refrain from crossing busy streets, going into dangerous neighborhoods and such.

[#UnleashSean]

Not a huge fan.  I would prefer the 64 best teams in the NCAA regardless of conference affiliation and the next best 32 for the NIT. 

If I were to change it I would put more importance on the Conference Tournament and say only the winner gets into the NCAA tournament.  They then battle it out for who is the best team.  Then have the runner-up or regular season champion play in the NIT.  If you want to expand the tournament then you could have the top 4 teams from each conference play.  Very similar model to European soccer.   

I like that approach better because:
1.  It breaks up the need for conference affiliation. Having a monster conference like the current ACC and Big Ten is actually a detriment to your chances of making the tournament
2.  It removes the subjectivity of the selection process
3.  The conference tournament has more importance overall.

So the regular season means literally nothing at this point?

[Benny B]

Yep. If the USC players are not playing to protect their interests, they should also refrain from crossing busy streets, going into dangerous neighborhoods and such.

Exactly.

I'll reiterate: bailing on the NIT has nothing to do with protecting one's interests.  This is some kid trying out his best impression of activism.... either that or he's just a whiny little baby who doesn't like not getting his way.  If folks want to do their own impression of "gullible moron," just keep pushing the [squeaky voice]"he's looking out for his best interests"[/squeaky] garbage.


That being said, it's 100% his prerogative whether his sits or plays, and I have no problem with anyone's decision to sit out.  But let's at least recognize the motivations for what they are, and not for what best suits your personal agenda.

[lawdog77]

I would either eliminate the conference tourney or not allow the results from the non championship games to be computed into who makes the tourney. It seems inconsistent. Some are weighted heavily (Alabama), while others are not (Providence).

Also. Selection criteria should be a little more transparent before the season starts.

[GGGG]

Exactly.

I'll reiterate: bailing on the NIT has nothing to do with protecting one's interests. 

Of course it does.  There is nothing for a player to gain by playing in the NIT.  And there is a chance for player injury to occur.

Making silly comparisons to crossing a street notwithstanding. 

[Mr. Sand-Knit]

How is this similar to the European soccer model?  Right now, the top four European leagues get four guaranteed places in the Champions League group stages.

If anything, European soccer has become more like the NCAAs.  Reason?  Eyeballs.

Eye balls sure, however the best teams are in the best leagues and btw Italy is getting screwed in the current makeup. Just sayin

[GGGG]

Eye balls sure, however the best teams are in the best leagues and btw Italy is getting screwed in the current makeup. Just sayin

Starting next year, Italy, England, Spain and Germany are all getting four guaranteed spots in the group stages. 

[Benny B]

Of course it does.  There is nothing for a player to gain by playing in the NIT.  And there is a chance for player injury to occur.

Making silly comparisons to crossing a street notwithstanding.

So again, I'll ask this question: to the player, what does the NCAAT offer that the NIT doesn't?

[GGGG]

So again, I'll ask this question: to the player, what does the NCAAT offer that the NIT doesn't?

A championship.