I think you're missing the point Rising (and GW69).  I don't have an argument with what you're saying.  However, when comparing the 5 NIT wins to the 2 NCAA wins that put GW in the Sweet 16, given the quality of opponents faced, which one is the more impressive athletic achievement?  Which was more challenging for GW?

The other point is that some here really diss the NIT as if it's really no big deal.  Well, it is a big deal for GW to even make the NIT field given the fact that the vast majority of years GW has failed to reach any postseason tournament.  So if making the field constitutes a true accomplishment, winning the whole thing should be perceived by any GW fan as a major one.

Gwmayhem wrote:

I think you're missing the point Rising (and GW69).  I don't have an argument with what you're saying.  However, when comparing the 5 NIT wins to the 2 NCAA wins that put GW in the Sweet 16, given the quality of opponents faced, which one is the more impressive athletic achievement?  Which was more challenging for GW?

The other point is that some here really diss the NIT as if it's really no big deal.  Well, it is a big deal for GW to even make the NIT field given the fact that the vast majority of years GW has failed to reach any postseason tournament.  So if making the field constitutes a true accomplishment, winning the whole thing should be perceived by any GW fan as a major one.

I think we are agreeing here for the most part. The NIT was a heck of an accomplishment and deserves praise and acclaim in GW basketball history (and even a place in the HOF). But that doesn't mean it is equal to the Sweet 16. If you ask the non-GW fan who is over 45-50 (those who were old enough to remember both) what they can recall first about GW, I guarantee most responses will be the Sweet 16. The NCAA tournament is what every D1 college coach aspires to. So even if it is tougher to win 5 games than 2 games, give me the Sweet 16 matchup with the Fab 5 all day, every day, and twice on Sundays.

Not looking at this from the perspective of a casual sports fan or even a huge fan of the sport.

Without any details, if you were to blindly ask me "Sweet 16 or NIT Championship", like most people, I am saying "Sweet 16."

My two points continue to be:

a) The NIT run was a more impressive athletic feat than our Sweet 16 run was; and 

b) Making the NIT, let alone winning the NIT, tends to be underrated by some GW fans here.  This isn't a discussion about Kansas making the NIT, or even Maryland making the NIT (both would be viewed as disappointments by their fan bases).  For GW and its fans, it should be much higher regarded than it is (by some...more than just a few).

2022-23 will be the 7th consecutive year Hobbs has been the co-architect of an incredible Big 10 Revival of Rutgers fortunes along with his former GW Assistant Steve Pikiell, now HC.

2022-23 will be the 7th consecutive year that Mike Lonergan remains entirely out of the sport, after being fired for abusing his GW players. 

Says it all about the 2 Ex GW Coaches. 
 

GWRising wrote:

BGF wrote:

Mayhem, I think you’ve written a perfect assessment of why the NIT is more worthy of our pride than our Sweet 16 year. It was a fantastic run and it should not be considered “less than.”

 Hold on. It's one thing to say the NIT is worthy of a remarkable accomplishment and, as I have argued, makes ML worthy of HOF consideration. But let's not go overboard. The Sweet 16 appearance is (and will always be until surpassed) the seminal moment in GW basketball history. If you gave any coach the choice between a Sweet 16 appearance and NIT Championship at a school like GW, I would bet they would pick the former. Again, taking nothing away from the great accomplishment that the NIT Championship was, the NCAA tournament is the gold standard in college basketball.

Please don't get me wrong.  The Sweet 16 year was fantastic, and more importantly for the program, it gave GW a bump in prominence, into the national conversation.  But that team was no better than the NIT Championship team.  We backed into the NCAAs, after losing 3 of our last 4 games before the NCAA draw was set.  The upset over New Mexico was fantastic, and then we beat a 13-seed.  That doesn't diminish the accomplishment, but the team was very good, not great. 

The Michigan game is one of my best moments from my GW career (by then I was a staff member).  I coordinated a watch party for my student staff at the Smith Center (where I worked), and there are photos I still have of about 40 of us just going crazy.  It was truly memorable for me (and for every GW fan, I'm sure!).  I'm smiling just thinking about it!

For me, though, I look at the NIT Championship team as more impressive, and as the 2nd most successful team in our modern history (which began in 1984 for me). 

Like 1992-93, we finished the regular season poorly, which is why we ended up in the NIT, of course.  At the end of the day, with the NIT championship, we won our final five games and ended the season with a victory.  And we won the semi-final and championship games with high double-digit margins.  The roster was top-notch. 

While I am not in favor of Mike Lonergan getting into the hall of fame, and won't be until any truths become public, his accomplishments cannot be denied.  He took a team that had to be disappointed to not finish strong enough to get into the NCAAs and motivated them to maximum success. 

Over ML's final three seasons, the team went 74-32.  I know that there are people on this board who know the truth (or think they do), and I certainly won't and can't speak to what happened off the court or who was wronged, because I have no position or knowledge to do so.  But I will say that the NIT Championship year was more impressive in my mind than that the Sweet 16 year, for no other reason that they accomplished the maximum that they were able to do so in the post-season.  

And for what it's worth, neither of these teams was as good as the 2005-2006 27-3 team.  While it ended too soon, it ended against a #1 seed (like 1992-93), but the fact that this team was 16-0 in conference, that to me is more impressive than anything since I joined the GW family in '84. 

I know this is a thread about the HOF credentials for both coaches, but I felt the need to defend my argument about the NIT Championship team's validity.
 

I enjoyed the NIT run. It was a very nice ending to what was otherwise a disappointing season. And I thought ML was a good coach, and GW would have obviously been a lot better the last 5 years if things had worked out for him here. But the fact is that no one outside of this board gives a crap about the NIT. Ask the fanbase of any team that has won an NIT championship over the last 40 years what the best moments in their program's history are and none of them will mention the NIT championship. It's a nice tournament to win, but calling it a "National Title" is laughable.

DC Native wrote:

I enjoyed the NIT run. It was a very nice ending to what was otherwise a disappointing season. And I thought ML was a good coach, and GW would have obviously been a lot better the last 5 years if things had worked out for him here. But the fact is that no one outside of this board gives a crap about the NIT. Ask the fanbase of any team that has won an NIT championship over the last 40 years what the best moments in their program's history are and none of them will mention the NIT championship. It's a nice tournament to win, but calling it a "National Title" is laughable.

Was it really an otherwise disappointing season?  Game 2 was a nationally televised victory over UVA, then the #6 team in the country.  An impressive split on a neutral court against Tennessee (W) and #24 ranked Cincinnati (L).  Consecutive wins at home over Seton Hall, Penn State and 83-49 over Rutgers, the game that undoubtedly gave Rutgers strong interest in Mike Lonergan.  Bad loss at DePaul followed by a solid road win at UCF.  Began conference play 7-3 before the schedule turned much more difficult.  In losing 4 of their final 8, these losses came against St. Joe's (28 wins, 13-5 in conference), at St. Bonaventure (22 wins, 14-4), VCU (25 wins, 14-4 and who GW had beaten in Richmond) and at Davidson (20 wins, 10-8 and who GW had beaten at home earlier).  GW finished as the 5 seed with an 11-7 conference record). 

Wins against UVA, Tennessee, Seton Hall, Penn State, Rutgers, at UCF, Davidson, and at VCU?  A national ranking as high as #20 during the season?  Hard to refer to this as a disappointing season prior to the NIT.  Just a choppy end to the regular season, losing five games (including the conference tournament) to 5 schools that each won 20 or more games.

The truth came out. That dead spin article gets a lot right. The video alone should show you that ML wanting to whistle blow that creepy discount Kevin Spacey isn't that large of a leap of faith. The only things really omitted in that article were who the "5" players were, all of whom had personal grudges or were doing some WILD stuff in the background. Yes I know all 5.