[jacket3ree]

They still play the NIT?

Us old guys will take any post-season games.

I said this elsewhere in reference to the women's team, but the program must absolutely participate in games and tournaments to fly the flag (recruitment, advancing the brand, exposure to alumni), to give the team more chances to compete (make it fun for the athletes, recruit the team back each year), and also to gain more experience (more practices, more games).  I assume there's also some revenue that comes with postseason tournament participation as well.

I responded to that thought in the women's thread, but I think "absolutely" is a bit strong, more so for the women than the men. For the women, the flag says this was a train wreck of a season after 36 trips to the only tournament that matters. Or at least, that needs to be the mind set. Tougher call for the men. I'm sure they are NIT bound against some decent competition and the message is 'hey we might be good in the not distant future.' Again, that is debatable because teams simply don't stay together so the future is always now, now. Also remember that postseason revenue can be negative when Not In Tournament and my understanding is that Stanford is in the poor house suddenly, so maybe that's more of a deal than before?

Post season revenue is primarily based on how well the conference does through to the Final Four. Sucks for Stanford that the ACC isn't what it once was in that regard. Or that Stanford took such a conference revenue share haircut while begging in.

[jacket3ree]

They still play the NIT?

Us old guys will take any post-season games.

I said this elsewhere in reference to the women's team, but the program must absolutely participate in games and tournaments to fly the flag (recruitment, advancing the brand, exposure to alumni), to give the team more chances to compete (make it fun for the athletes, recruit the team back each year), and also to gain more experience (more practices, more games).  I assume there's also some revenue that comes with postseason tournament participation as well.

I responded to that thought in the women's thread, but I think "absolutely" is a bit strong, more so for the women than the men. For the women, the flag says this was a train wreck of a season after 36 trips to the only tournament that matters. Or at least, that needs to be the mind set. Tougher call for the men. I'm sure they are NIT bound against some decent competition and the message is 'hey we might be good in the not distant future.' Again, that is debatable because teams simply don't stay together so the future is always now, now. Also remember that postseason revenue can be negative when Not In Tournament and my understanding is that Stanford is in the poor house suddenly, so maybe that's more of a deal than before?

Post season revenue is primarily based on how well the conference does through to the Final Four. Sucks for Stanford that the ACC isn't what it once was in that regard. Or that Stanford took such a conference revenue share haircut while begging in.