(04-02-2016 02:41 PM)stever20 Wrote:  There is no ******* reason why 2 teams that didn't even make the dumb ass NIT this year not only would get in, but automatically get in the round of 64, while teams like VCU, UConn, Cincy, etc. have to win 2 games to just get there. **** that and **** the p5.

This is precisely why I'm not in favor of expanding the NCAA tournament at all.

While half the A-10 would probably get in every year

The P5 teams would get double byes. Pretty much all of them.

And the little guys would be shunted off into even earlier rounds with less exposure than they get now. More seeds = more opportunity to screw the auto qualifiers.

---

My basketball team won the NIT this year. That was reward in and of itself. We had every opportunity to make the dance - but we blew it. Some years GW's record would have been good enough to make the dance. This year - it just didn't happen.

Why is this thread still going on? I thought we agreed that the NIT should be a preliminary to the NCAA Tournament? Anything else looks strange.

(04-02-2016 06:02 PM)_C2_ Wrote:  Why is this thread still going on? I thought we agreed that the NIT should be a preliminary to the NCAA Tournament? Anything else looks strange.

Sorry, I actually disagree. I think that if the NCAA wishes to expand, they should simply expand the NCAA tournament to 96 teams.

I don't think any auto qualifier should be in a play in round.

---

As far as set asides go, other than for conference champions, this initiative is rife with problems. Because if they start setting slots aside for lower ranked conferences, eventually the bigs will insist on set asides too. And a lot more of them.

And without set asides, it gets even worse. Adding 28 teams to the dance would result in 3-4 bids for the A-10, 2 for the AAC, 2 for the WCC, 6-8 for the rest of the conferences. And 11-13 more bids at a minimum for the Big East+P5. And the seeds for teams like UALR will slide as well.

If I'm the A-10 or WCC or MVC or AAC, it probably helps our leagues. But for everyone else, probably a huge negative.

---

And if you leave the auto bid mechanism to the NIT, you'll harm conference tournaments. And it would be even worse if autobids from lower conferences played in the play in games too. Teams could 'rest' during the conference tournaments in order to help a conference team etc. Who cares if youre in the SWAC or A-Sun? You're going to the play in anyway, so why not take a conference mate?

---

There will always be arguments as to who deserves to be in the dance. And controversies as to the last team in the dance.

---

I say, make all of the first 4 at larges, and leave the tournament at 68. The NIT is fine as it is. And every team in it had a play in tournament for the NCAA....their conference tournament.

That's what I'm saying: the status quo or the NIT into the NCAA's. Anything else is just throwing something at the wall hoping it sticks.

Why not just eliminate auto qualifiers entirely? Just invite the 64 best teams regardless of conference. No play-ins. No byes. No muss. No fuss.

If you are concerned about the loss of revenue for conferences that get left out (as many no doubt would) then simply pay every D-I school $150K off the top. That's about what they get now (one unit of $250K X 6 years / 10 teams avg conference size).

Because you'd cut off access to the NCAA Tournament for most conferences and make it like football. The minor conferences would never agree to that unless revenue sharing was great enough for justify it. The HBCU conferences (MEAC, SWAC) might sue on grounds of civil rights.

FTR, I have proposed and agreed with the idea in the past.

what has made the tourney what it is today is the upsets like Middle Tennessee over Michigan St, SF Austin over West Virginia, etc.

(04-03-2016 11:05 AM)stever20 Wrote:  what has made the tourney what it is today is the upsets like Middle Tennessee over Michigan St, SF Austin over West Virginia, etc.

Why do those have to go away? SF Austin would have been in this year's field even without an AQ. So would Yale and Little Rock. If you took the top 64 eligible teams by their pre-tournament RPI this year, 20 of them would have come from outside the traditional basketball power conferences.

The key would be that you would have to remove the committee's selection bias by using some measure (or combination of measures) of strength in identifying the 64 teams. Maybe RPI isn't a particularly good measure (the committee apparently doesn't think very much of it). But I think if you took the aggregate ratings of the RPI, KenPom and Sagarin) you would get a list that most people could accept.

(04-03-2016 08:18 AM)ken d Wrote:  Why not just eliminate auto qualifiers entirely? Just invite the 64 best teams regardless of conference. No play-ins. No byes. No muss. No fuss.

If you are concerned about the loss of revenue for conferences that get left out (as many no doubt would) then simply pay every D-I school $150K off the top. That's about what they get now (one unit of $250K X 6 years / 10 teams avg conference size).

That would destroy the NCAA tournament. And would end about 200 basketball programs overnight. And would harm the big college teams regular season as every one of them would get in the dance so the conference season would be meaningless.

I just don't get this thing to mess with the tourney. It's not broken. There's an old saying. If it ain't broke, don't fix it. So why are folks trying to reinvent the wheel?

There are adjustments that could be made (besides pool play, which I promote, there could be reseeding) but otherwise it's fine as is.

the only adjustment that I think we're going to see the power conferences push for(with the help of the AAC, A10) is within a few years, the First 4 will be 61-68 playing for 16 seed.

(04-03-2016 02:07 PM)stever20 Wrote:  the only adjustment that I think we're going to see the power conferences push for(with the help of the AAC, A10) is within a few years, the First 4 will be 61-68 playing for 16 seed.

That isn't fair to the 1 seeds. A better solution is to remove the autobids from the play in games and make both of them play ins for a 12 seed.

(04-03-2016 03:31 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(04-03-2016 02:07 PM)stever20 Wrote:  the only adjustment that I think we're going to see the power conferences push for(with the help of the AAC, A10) is within a few years, the First 4 will be 61-68 playing for 16 seed.

That isn't fair to the 1 seeds. A better solution is to remove the autobids from the play in games and make both of them play ins for a 12 seed.

What does the 1 seed have to with it? As a 1 seed, you should be crushing anyone that is 61-68.

I agree...play-in for all the 16 seeds, which hopefully gives the stronger seed to lose to the 1 seed...lol!

No. This idea to expand by letting those 'qualified' for the NIT then become part of the BD smacks of 'everyone gets a trophy'. There needs to be a cut off. Leave things as is. Truly don't see the benefits.

I'm fine with the status quo but at least we never would ever hear the last team out talk about how they were robbed. They have a reprieve, as well as the regular season champs that were caught sleepwalking in their conference tournaments. That's better than taking part in a tournament that otherwise is a waste of everyone's time and holding up a hollow trophy that smacks of being no. 69 or even no. 50.

(03-29-2016 01:03 PM)kreed5120 Wrote:  Using the NIT as a play-in tournament to March Madness sounds like a really good idea. A lot better than what I 1st suggested.

You know that would seriously be a great idea. Make a 64 team tourney bracket and then make the NIT a tournament to prove who the last 4 in should be.

The final four in the NIT get those spots and would pretty much eliminate any "we should have gotten a chance" controversy.

(04-04-2016 02:33 PM)TrojanCampaign Wrote:  

(03-29-2016 01:03 PM)kreed5120 Wrote:  Using the NIT as a play-in tournament to March Madness sounds like a really good idea. A lot better than what I 1st suggested.

You know that would seriously be a great idea. Make a 64 team tourney bracket and then make the NIT a tournament to prove who the last 4 in should be.

The final four in the NIT get those spots and would pretty much eliminate any "we should have gotten a chance" controversy.

Or, you could have 128 teams, and have the 64 first round losers be your NIT field and the 64 winners be the NCAA field.

I have never seen so much chit-chat over how to improve the NIT. Who cares what happens to the NIT unless it's incorporated into the NCAA Tournament.