(10-27-2023 02:09 PM)stever20 Wrote:  so here are the 12 teams that would have gotten in last year.
Rutgers 19-14 NIT
Oklahoma St 18-15 NIT
North Carolina 20-13
Oregon 19-14 NIT
Ohio St 16-19
Clemson 23-10 NIT
Michigan 17-15 NIT
Florida 16-16 NIT
Texas Tech 16-16
Oklahoma 15-17
Colorado 17-16 NIT
Washington St 17-16 NIT

NIT means they were actually in last year.

Ohio State, Texas Tech and Oklahoma: combined record 47-52

Imagine the excitement in Columbus, Lubbock and Norman last year if each had been bestowed the opportunity to host a first-round game in the NIT? /s

This change really reeks of the coaches from the P6 conferences collectively whining to their AD's that they were getting shafted from the postseason by schools with lower RPI's from lesser conferences.

Who else would even care enough to push forward such a measure?

I'm a Big East basketball fan in addition to the Canes, but this is total and complete BS

There were quite a few good upper mid-major teams over the years who didn't get in the NIT with the low conference autobids taking up 8-10 spots, so this might help them.

(10-27-2023 02:09 PM)stever20 Wrote:  so here are the 12 teams that would have gotten in last year.
Rutgers 19-14 NIT
Oklahoma St 18-15 NIT
North Carolina 20-13
Oregon 19-14 NIT
Ohio St 16-19
Clemson 23-10 NIT
Michigan 17-15 NIT
Florida 16-16 NIT
Texas Tech 16-16
Oklahoma 15-17
Colorado 17-16 NIT
Washington St 17-16 NIT

NIT means they were actually in last year.

I see three Big 12 teams, 3 Big 10 teams, 3 Pac 12 teams, 1 SEC team and no Big East teams.

(10-27-2023 02:14 PM)GoldenWarrior11 Wrote:  "Instead, the NIT will guarantee two teams (based on the NET rankings) from each of six conferences (Atlantic Coast, Big East, Big Ten, Big 12, Pac-12 and Southeastern). The top two teams in the NET rankings not qualifying for the NCAA men’s basketball tournament from each conference, regardless of won-loss record, will be selected. Additionally, the 12 teams automatically selected will be guaranteed the opportunity to host a game in the first round of the NIT."

Presumably, the "Power NET NIT" auto bids drop from 12 to 10 in the Spring of 2025 with the destruction of the Pac 12

This might cause conferences like the Big South and OVC to put the conference tournament at the 1-seed, which is a significantly better environment than a neutral site with 1-2k fans.

Why should on-the-court performance matter when there's money to be made?

What a farce.

This is going to hurt so hard for some teams that have their best season in years or even decades, but happen to have an off day, or go against a team that magically shoots crazy accurate for that one day, to lose their conference tournament. No reward of a post season of any kind for them if the rest of their conference brought their NET down.

The P6 (soon to be 5, unless they keep the PAC around for some reason) don't need this. Gotta love money influencing it more. Also of note: they are now making it an official distinction in basketball as well, that shoots the AAC, MWC, A10, MVC, and WCC down to the same "not equal" status as all others. Looks like they may just forego bringing anyone else along if they break away in the future.

I could be wrong about this, but this is what the NIT field would've looked like last season based on the NET rankings, but the use of an NIT committee could alter this. My list used was from the link below so hopefully they're correct (NET rankings after conference tourneys). * = Actual NIT Participants

NET Rankings: https://sports.betmgm.com/en/blog/ncaab/...ment-bm10/
Listed non-NCAA Tournament Teams: https://bracketologists.com/

Autobids:
#40 Rutgers (B1G, 19-14)*
#43 Oklahoma St. (B12, 18-15)*
#46 North Carolina (ACC, 20-13, declined)
#47 Oregon (PAC, 19-14)*
#52 Ohio St. (B1G, 16-19)
#60 Clemson (ACC, 23-10)*
#62 Florida (SEC, 16-16)*
#63 Texas Tech (B12, 16-16)
#69 Colorado (PAC, 17-16)*
#75 Villanova (BE, 17-16)*
#76 Virginia Tech (ACC, 19-14, replaces UNC as ACC autobid)*
#77 Seton Hall (BE, 16-15)*
#81 Vanderbilt (SEC, 20-14)*

At-Large:
#38 North Texas* (24-7)
#44 Liberty* (23-8)
#54 New Mexico* (21-11)
#57 UAB* (24-9)
#61 Michigan* (17-15)
#64 Yale* (19-8)
#65 Sam Houston St.* (21-7)
#68 Oklahoma (15-17)
#70 Cincinnati* (20-12)
#71 UCF* (18-14)
#72 Bradley* (24-9)
#73 Washington St.* (17-16)
#74 Utah Valley* (22-8)
#78 Dayton (22-12, declined)
#79 Utah (17-15)
#80 Wisconsin* (17-14)
#82 Toledo* (26-7)
#83 Marshall (23-8)
#84 Santa Clara* (22-9)
#85 BYU (17-15, replaces VT as at-large)
#86 Hofstra* (23-9, replaces Dayton)

First Four Out:
#87 Southern Miss* (22-7)
#90 Wake Forest (19-14)
#91 UNLV (18-13)
#92 Nebraska (16-16)

Remaining NIT Participants not Qualifying:
#96 UC Irvine* (21-11)
#123 Youngstown St.* (22-9)
#128 Eastern Washington* (21-10)
#228 Morehead St.* (17-11)
#245 Alcorn St.* (18-13)

(10-27-2023 02:35 PM)GoBuckeyes1047 Wrote:  I could be wrong about this, but this is what the NIT field would've looked like last season based on the NET rankings, but the use of an NIT committee could alter this. My list used was from the link below so hopefully they're correct (NET rankings after conference tourneys). * = Actual NIT Participants
https://bracketologists.com/

Autobids:
#40 Rutgers (B1G)*
#42 Oklahoma St. (B12)*
#44 North Carolina (ACC, declined)
#45 Oregon (PAC)*
#49 Ohio St. (B1G)
#62 Texas Tech (B12)
#67 Clemson (ACC)*
#71 Villanova (BE)*
#73 Florida (SEC)*
#74 Seton Hall (BE)*
#75 Virginia Tech (ACC, replaces UNC)*
#77 Colorado (PAC)*
#81 Vanderbilt (SEC)*

At-Large:
#33 North Texas*
#39 UAB*
#46 Liberty*
#57 Michigan*
#58 Utah Valley*
#63 Cincinnati*
#64 New Mexico*
#65 Yale*
#66 UCF*
#69 Sam Houston St.*
#70 Oklahoma
#72 Wisconsin*
#77 Dayton (declined)
#78 Bradley*
#79 Washington St.*
#80 Utah
#82 Toledo*
#83 Marshall
#84 BYU
#85 Hofstra*
#87 Santa Clara* (replaces Dayton)

First Four Out:
#89 Wake Forest
#90 Southern Miss*
#91 St. John's
#92 Nebraska

Remaining NIT Participants not Qualifying:
#102 UC Irvine*
#120 Eastern Washington*
#127 Youngstown St.*
#219 Morehead St.*
#245 Alcorn St.*

So this might actually help upper mid-majors. That's kind of what I expected. The net bids added to P5 schools would be less than the net bids subtracted from low major autobids.

(10-27-2023 02:12 PM)GoldenWarrior11 Wrote:  

(10-27-2023 02:09 PM)stever20 Wrote:  so here are the 12 teams that would have gotten in last year.
Rutgers 19-14 NIT
Oklahoma St 18-15 NIT
North Carolina 20-13
Oregon 19-14 NIT
Ohio St 16-19
Clemson 23-10 NIT
Michigan 17-15 NIT
Florida 16-16 NIT
Texas Tech 16-16
Oklahoma 15-17
Colorado 17-16 NIT
Washington St 17-16 NIT

NIT means they were actually in last year.

Big East is guaranteed to get two in too (that would have been Villanova and Seton Hall). It's top-2 from each of the P6 conferences, if I'm reading correctly.

ok so those 2 in Vandy in as 2nd SEC, and automatically out would be Michigan, Oklahoma, and Washington St.

So I guess the Pac-12 is going to live in some capacity after all, although I doubt this would be a sufficient carrot for AAC schools to jump.

This definitely helps the Mountain West on terms of merging with the Pac-12, though.

I don't know that declined bids then could be automatically replaced in conference. Probably so but no guarantee.

Absolutely rancid

(10-27-2023 01:48 PM)Tiger1983 Wrote:  Is this a joke?

Yes, and schools like mine and your conference mates (assuming you get an ACC or Pac lifeline) are the butt of it.

(10-27-2023 02:47 PM)herdfan2013 Wrote:  

(10-27-2023 01:48 PM)Tiger1983 Wrote:  Is this a joke?

Yes, and schools like mine and your conference mates (assuming you get an ACC or Pac lifeline) are the butt of it.

Well played.

(10-27-2023 02:09 PM)stever20 Wrote:  so here are the 12 teams that would have gotten in last year.
Rutgers 19-14 NIT
Oklahoma St 18-15 NIT
North Carolina 20-13
Oregon 19-14 NIT
Ohio St 16-19
Clemson 23-10 NIT
Michigan 17-15 NIT
Florida 16-16 NIT
Texas Tech 16-16
Oklahoma 15-17
Colorado 17-16 NIT
Washington St 17-16 NIT

NIT means they were actually in last year.

Didn't North Carolina turn down an invitation to the NIT last year? There was a time that it was not a step down (I'm thinking of Al McGuire at Marquette way back when).

ETA: Just saw Go Buckeyes answered my question before I asked it.

Based on NCAA NET as of Selection Sunday, if Power NET NIT 6x2 rule was in effect:

Made NIT anway
Clemson
Rutgers
Okla St
Villanova
Seton Hall
Oregon
Colorado
Florida
Vanderbilt

Missed NIT but would make it under new rule
North Carolina
Ohio St
Texas Tech

(10-27-2023 02:44 PM)stever20 Wrote:  I don't know that declined bids then could be automatically replaced in conference. Probably so but no guarantee.

I'm not sure declining a bid will be an option. If the idea is to sell this for more money because more big names will be involved, UNC damn well better show up if they are "worthy."

So eliminate the AQ teams that actually care for teams that are pissed they didn't get in the Tournament