Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
2018 NIT/CBI/CIT bids and declines
Author Message
stever20 Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 30,466
Joined: Nov 2011
Reputation: 284
I Root For: College Sports
Location:
Post: #21
RE: 2018 NIT/CBI/CIT bids and declines
(03-04-2018 03:10 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  You don't really get a second credit for advancing out of the first four do you? That doesn't make any sense. You shouldn't reward teams on the bubble for advancing into the round of 64.

yes you do.
03-04-2018 03:25 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Wedge Offline
Moderator
*

Posts: 13,744
Joined: May 2010
Reputation: 441
I Root For: California
Location: Bear Territory
Post: #22
RE: 2018 NIT/CBI/CIT bids and declines
(03-04-2018 02:46 PM)stever20 Wrote:  
(03-04-2018 02:42 PM)Wedge Wrote:  
(03-04-2018 02:28 PM)mturn017 Wrote:  
(03-04-2018 02:18 PM)Wedge Wrote:  
(03-04-2018 12:43 PM)stever20 Wrote:  I just LOL at folks who want to change what has made March the best month into something different. And yes, part of what makes March incredible is the conference tourney's with the bids at stake.

OK then, because your argument is based on the games being fun to watch, we'll hold you to that and apply the logic to CFB: Because the CFP games, like many (not all) of the March Madness games, are very entertaining, you agree that there should be no change whatsoever to the current College Football Playoff, and we will all agree to LOL at anyone who wants to change it into something different. 07-coffee3

I don't think that's what his argument is based on. The fun part of March Madness is the single elimination aspect of it where it's all on the line and the fact that almost every team in the country has the opportunity to be crowned the champ if they just keep winning. It's a true tournament setting.

That's EXACTLY what his argument is: His position is that because tournaments are fun to watch, the fact that an excellent regular season can mean almost nothing doesn't matter at all.

I'm saying that it should matter that an excellent regular season gets many teams nothing more than seeding for a conference tournament, and it's a mistake that the NCAA allows conferences to make their basketball regular season almost irrelevant.

Anyone who has ever complained about the college hoops regular season having little importance should not be supporting the idea of NCAA autobids going to conference tournament winners rather than regular season champs.
I'd rather have the regular season meaningless than the postseason being a joke. In college football, the regular season is meaningful, but the post season is a joke. In college basketball regular season is meaningless, but the postseason is incredible. Give me college basketball 100% of the time.

Your justification for the college basketball postseason is, "Who cares if it's fair, what matters is that the games are entertaining." The exact same justification could be applied to the College Football Playoff, whose games have been very entertaining.
03-04-2018 03:58 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
stever20 Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 30,466
Joined: Nov 2011
Reputation: 284
I Root For: College Sports
Location:
Post: #23
RE: 2018 NIT/CBI/CIT bids and declines
(03-04-2018 03:58 PM)Wedge Wrote:  
(03-04-2018 02:46 PM)stever20 Wrote:  
(03-04-2018 02:42 PM)Wedge Wrote:  
(03-04-2018 02:28 PM)mturn017 Wrote:  
(03-04-2018 02:18 PM)Wedge Wrote:  OK then, because your argument is based on the games being fun to watch, we'll hold you to that and apply the logic to CFB: Because the CFP games, like many (not all) of the March Madness games, are very entertaining, you agree that there should be no change whatsoever to the current College Football Playoff, and we will all agree to LOL at anyone who wants to change it into something different. 07-coffee3

I don't think that's what his argument is based on. The fun part of March Madness is the single elimination aspect of it where it's all on the line and the fact that almost every team in the country has the opportunity to be crowned the champ if they just keep winning. It's a true tournament setting.

That's EXACTLY what his argument is: His position is that because tournaments are fun to watch, the fact that an excellent regular season can mean almost nothing doesn't matter at all.

I'm saying that it should matter that an excellent regular season gets many teams nothing more than seeding for a conference tournament, and it's a mistake that the NCAA allows conferences to make their basketball regular season almost irrelevant.

Anyone who has ever complained about the college hoops regular season having little importance should not be supporting the idea of NCAA autobids going to conference tournament winners rather than regular season champs.
I'd rather have the regular season meaningless than the postseason being a joke. In college football, the regular season is meaningful, but the post season is a joke. In college basketball regular season is meaningless, but the postseason is incredible. Give me college basketball 100% of the time.

Your justification for the college basketball postseason is, "Who cares if it's fair, what matters is that the games are entertaining." The exact same justification could be applied to the College Football Playoff, whose games have been very entertaining.

It's that everyone has a chance. Definitely not that way in college football, where for 65 teams you are done before the season.
03-04-2018 04:04 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
jhn31 Offline
Water Engineer
*

Posts: 76
Joined: Sep 2014
Reputation: 2
I Root For: Mississippi St.
Location:
Post: #24
RE: 2018 NIT/CBI/CIT bids and declines
Theoretically you'd see more upsets if every non-power conference sent their best team to the NCAA Tournament, rather than whoever got hot one weekend.
03-04-2018 04:29 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
stever20 Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 30,466
Joined: Nov 2011
Reputation: 284
I Root For: College Sports
Location:
Post: #25
RE: 2018 NIT/CBI/CIT bids and declines
(03-04-2018 04:29 PM)jhn31 Wrote:  Theoretically you'd see more upsets if every non-power conference sent their best team to the NCAA Tournament, rather than whoever got hot one weekend.

thing is though for a lot of times- there's not much difference between 1 and 2 seeds. I mean Big South there was little difference between UNC Asheville and Radford.

1 change they made that I like is if you don't win the conference tourney as #1 seed you are automatically in the NIT.
03-04-2018 04:33 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Wedge Offline
Moderator
*

Posts: 13,744
Joined: May 2010
Reputation: 441
I Root For: California
Location: Bear Territory
Post: #26
RE: 2018 NIT/CBI/CIT bids and declines
(03-04-2018 04:04 PM)stever20 Wrote:  
(03-04-2018 03:58 PM)Wedge Wrote:  
(03-04-2018 02:46 PM)stever20 Wrote:  
(03-04-2018 02:42 PM)Wedge Wrote:  
(03-04-2018 02:28 PM)mturn017 Wrote:  I don't think that's what his argument is based on. The fun part of March Madness is the single elimination aspect of it where it's all on the line and the fact that almost every team in the country has the opportunity to be crowned the champ if they just keep winning. It's a true tournament setting.

That's EXACTLY what his argument is: His position is that because tournaments are fun to watch, the fact that an excellent regular season can mean almost nothing doesn't matter at all.

I'm saying that it should matter that an excellent regular season gets many teams nothing more than seeding for a conference tournament, and it's a mistake that the NCAA allows conferences to make their basketball regular season almost irrelevant.

Anyone who has ever complained about the college hoops regular season having little importance should not be supporting the idea of NCAA autobids going to conference tournament winners rather than regular season champs.
I'd rather have the regular season meaningless than the postseason being a joke. In college football, the regular season is meaningful, but the post season is a joke. In college basketball regular season is meaningless, but the postseason is incredible. Give me college basketball 100% of the time.

Your justification for the college basketball postseason is, "Who cares if it's fair, what matters is that the games are entertaining." The exact same justification could be applied to the College Football Playoff, whose games have been very entertaining.

It's that everyone has a chance. Definitely not that way in college football, where for 65 teams you are done before the season.

If you give autobids to regular season champs, then everyone already has a chance -- win your conference's regular season and you're in.

What exists now is that teams who are terrible in the regular season get an undeserved second chance. Doesn't matter for any conference whose regular season champ is going to get an at-large bid anyway, but for the winners of the other 23 conferences it matters a lot. Example: Northern Kentucky's 15-3 conference regular season got them nothing. They're out and a team that was 6-12 in the regular season is still in it. Essentially, they played 30 exhibition games and then lost the only game that counted. Might as well skip the regular season and draw conference tournament seedings at random.
03-04-2018 04:37 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
_C2_ Offline
The King of Overanalysis
*

Posts: 19,290
Joined: Feb 2008
Reputation: 366
I Root For: Houston
Location: Zamunda
Post: #27
RE: 2018 NIT/CBI/CIT bids and declines
(03-04-2018 12:52 AM)Wedge Wrote:  The NCAA has it backwards.

NCAA tournament autobids should go to regular season conference champs, and NIT autobids should go to conference tournament winners who don't get invited to the NCAA tournament.

It should in theory but Quo has got it covered. Why even play if you already know whose going to the NCAA's?

What conferences should do is limit the number of teams that have a shot. Why even play the regular season if the worst team in the conference can steal the auto-bid by having a hot three/four day run? And some have done this in the past; that is limit the number of teams.

Or do like the Ivy did and do a playoff in the event of a tie.
03-04-2018 04:44 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
RutgersGuy Online
1st String
*

Posts: 2,396
Joined: Nov 2015
Reputation: 110
I Root For: Rutgers
Location:
Post: #28
RE: 2018 NIT/CBI/CIT bids and declines
(03-04-2018 12:52 AM)Wedge Wrote:  The NCAA has it backwards.

NCAA tournament autobids should go to regular season conference champs, and NIT autobids should go to conference tournament winners who don't get invited to the NCAA tournament.

It's not up to the NCAA it's up to each conference how they issue their auto-bid. Ivy used to do reg season champ.
03-04-2018 05:00 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
RutgersGuy Online
1st String
*

Posts: 2,396
Joined: Nov 2015
Reputation: 110
I Root For: Rutgers
Location:
Post: #29
RE: 2018 NIT/CBI/CIT bids and declines
I love these people who post about getting rid of more games. Like the folks who want to do away with bowl games. We get it, you don't like what everyone else likes! Let the 99% of the rest of us enjoy the status quo.
03-04-2018 05:06 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
stever20 Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 30,466
Joined: Nov 2011
Reputation: 284
I Root For: College Sports
Location:
Post: #30
RE: 2018 NIT/CBI/CIT bids and declines
We have #4 team for NIT with Florida Gulf Coast.
03-04-2018 05:32 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
_C2_ Offline
The King of Overanalysis
*

Posts: 19,290
Joined: Feb 2008
Reputation: 366
I Root For: Houston
Location: Zamunda
Post: #31
RE: 2018 NIT/CBI/CIT bids and declines
(03-04-2018 01:29 PM)Stugray2 Wrote:  
(03-04-2018 12:52 AM)Wedge Wrote:  The NCAA has it backwards.

NCAA tournament autobids should go to regular season conference champs, and NIT autobids should go to conference tournament winners who don't get invited to the NCAA tournament.

It's the conferences choice. Were I a small one bid conference and my tournament was lightly attended and didn't make much money I would go to the old Ivy League system of conference regular season winner. Only have a playoff game if two are tied (a problem with 3 or more at say 13-5).

But the reality is, many conference offices pay for themselves with their basketball tournaments, between gate and ESPN coverage, that there is no going back. Besides, if you are one of the usually >20 conferences whose entry will be a one and done, does it really matter regular season champ represent your conference? In a way should the worse program via tournament upset represent you, they may get you a play-in game and a chance at a 2nd credit for your conference, while the regular season champ gets an NIT bid your conference would never get.

I think the bottom 18 seeds (after the first four round) are something like 3-54 the last three years. So yes, statistically your conference is likely to win a game once every two decades -- with a play-in, that increases to once a decade if you win the lottery to get in two of those. (Speaks to better seeding recently, that the NCAA could go down to a 48 team tournament, and there would hardly be any difference in the round of 32 onward).

So while it may be desirable to see the best team from a terrible conference, in the big picture of the NCAA tournament it doesn't matter one iota. And from the conference standpoint it's too advantageous (NIT, conference tourney money to keep office funded, also chance to see all Presidents and ADs in one spot) to expect a change.

Yes and no to the last sentence of the second paragraph. More often than I can count a team capable of winning a game was knocked off by an unheralded team that got hot. For really minor conferences like the SWAC or NEC it doesn't make a world of difference who wins but for the Southern, Horizon and even the Summit, which every now and again produce bubble teams capable of making a Sweet 16 run or even deeper, it matters tremendously. Even the WAC fears anyone but New Mexico State taking the auto-bid. The WAC commissioner's office that is.

As for that 3-54 stat (which has to be totally off because there's four teams in each region), I think it looks way better without the 16 seeds, who to date have yet to win a game ever in any year. Sure, your chances of winning are still small but if the best teams all won their conference, it would mean better teams would be playing, right down to the 16-seeds and fewer complete layups for the top 12 teams.
03-04-2018 05:36 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
_C2_ Offline
The King of Overanalysis
*

Posts: 19,290
Joined: Feb 2008
Reputation: 366
I Root For: Houston
Location: Zamunda
Post: #32
RE: 2018 NIT/CBI/CIT bids and declines
(03-04-2018 02:38 PM)stever20 Wrote:  13 seeds and worse 3-54 last 3 years? Nope. Last 3 years they are 5-43 1st round. Add in 12's and they're 8-52 1st round.

Take out the 16-seeds and it's 8-36. Without doing any research, I'd assume there were 5-10 more close calls, so it's hardly improbable for the bottom quadrant or so of the bracket to win, sans the 16-seeds.
03-04-2018 05:46 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Cyniclone Online
Heisman
*

Posts: 5,419
Joined: Nov 2012
Reputation: 254
I Root For: ODU and VCU
Location:
Post: #33
RE: 2018 NIT/CBI/CIT bids and declines
Giving the auto bid to the regular season champ only works if the conference plays a true round robin. Otherwise, you run the risk of a 14-4 team that played a weaker in-conference schedule getting the auto bid and the 13-5 team that had to play the No. 3 and 4 teams twice is told to pound salt.
03-04-2018 08:50 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
msm96wolf Offline
All American
*

Posts: 3,486
Joined: Apr 2006
Reputation: 111
I Root For:
Location:
Post: #34
RE: 2018 NIT/CBI/CIT bids and declines
(03-04-2018 02:42 PM)Wedge Wrote:  
(03-04-2018 02:28 PM)mturn017 Wrote:  
(03-04-2018 02:18 PM)Wedge Wrote:  
(03-04-2018 12:43 PM)stever20 Wrote:  I just LOL at folks who want to change what has made March the best month into something different. And yes, part of what makes March incredible is the conference tourney's with the bids at stake.

OK then, because your argument is based on the games being fun to watch, we'll hold you to that and apply the logic to CFB: Because the CFP games, like many (not all) of the March Madness games, are very entertaining, you agree that there should be no change whatsoever to the current College Football Playoff, and we will all agree to LOL at anyone who wants to change it into something different. 07-coffee3

I don't think that's what his argument is based on. The fun part of March Madness is the single elimination aspect of it where it's all on the line and the fact that almost every team in the country has the opportunity to be crowned the champ if they just keep winning. It's a true tournament setting.

That's EXACTLY what his argument is: His position is that because tournaments are fun to watch, the fact that an excellent regular season can mean almost nothing doesn't matter at all.

I'm saying that it should matter that an excellent regular season gets many teams nothing more than seeding for a conference tournament, and it's a mistake that the NCAA allows conferences to make their basketball regular season almost irrelevant.

Anyone who has ever complained about the college hoops regular season having little importance should not be supporting the idea of NCAA autobids going to conference tournament winners rather than regular season champs.

NCAA has not desire to tell the conference what to do. Those teams that upset in the tournament usually get the best pre-tournament PR. NCAA does not lose out and conferences can change its mind. The whole NIT for regular season champs is the consolation for those who can't finish their business. Remember the NIT is now an NCAA event. Thus the NCAA already decided what to do with Regular Season Champs. Being an ACC fan for over 40 years, celebrating regular season champion means you lost in the ACC tournament and are not the real ACC Champion.
03-04-2018 09:07 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
bullet Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 27,213
Joined: Apr 2012
Reputation: 639
I Root For: Texas, UK, UGA
Location:
Post: #35
RE: 2018 NIT/CBI/CIT bids and declines
(03-04-2018 04:37 PM)Wedge Wrote:  
(03-04-2018 04:04 PM)stever20 Wrote:  
(03-04-2018 03:58 PM)Wedge Wrote:  
(03-04-2018 02:46 PM)stever20 Wrote:  
(03-04-2018 02:42 PM)Wedge Wrote:  That's EXACTLY what his argument is: His position is that because tournaments are fun to watch, the fact that an excellent regular season can mean almost nothing doesn't matter at all.

I'm saying that it should matter that an excellent regular season gets many teams nothing more than seeding for a conference tournament, and it's a mistake that the NCAA allows conferences to make their basketball regular season almost irrelevant.

Anyone who has ever complained about the college hoops regular season having little importance should not be supporting the idea of NCAA autobids going to conference tournament winners rather than regular season champs.
I'd rather have the regular season meaningless than the postseason being a joke. In college football, the regular season is meaningful, but the post season is a joke. In college basketball regular season is meaningless, but the postseason is incredible. Give me college basketball 100% of the time.

Your justification for the college basketball postseason is, "Who cares if it's fair, what matters is that the games are entertaining." The exact same justification could be applied to the College Football Playoff, whose games have been very entertaining.

It's that everyone has a chance. Definitely not that way in college football, where for 65 teams you are done before the season.

If you give autobids to regular season champs, then everyone already has a chance -- win your conference's regular season and you're in.

What exists now is that teams who are terrible in the regular season get an undeserved second chance. Doesn't matter for any conference whose regular season champ is going to get an at-large bid anyway, but for the winners of the other 23 conferences it matters a lot. Example: Northern Kentucky's 15-3 conference regular season got them nothing. They're out and a team that was 6-12 in the regular season is still in it. Essentially, they played 30 exhibition games and then lost the only game that counted. Might as well skip the regular season and draw conference tournament seedings at random.

I don't really have a problem with the conference tournaments. I have a problem with a team that is .500 in conference and so fails to do well in the regular season, loses in the conference tournament but still gets a 3rd chance by being invited to the NCAA tourney. There are simply too many undeserving schools.
03-04-2018 09:45 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Erictelevision Offline
Special Teams
*

Posts: 820
Joined: Jan 2016
Reputation: 10
I Root For: Uconn hoops
Location:
Post: #36
RE: 2018 NIT/CBI/CIT bids and declines
Cyniclone: that would be VERY bad for their blood pressure! 03-wink
03-04-2018 09:47 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Wedge Offline
Moderator
*

Posts: 13,744
Joined: May 2010
Reputation: 441
I Root For: California
Location: Bear Territory
Post: #37
RE: 2018 NIT/CBI/CIT bids and declines
(03-04-2018 09:45 PM)bullet Wrote:  
(03-04-2018 04:37 PM)Wedge Wrote:  
(03-04-2018 04:04 PM)stever20 Wrote:  
(03-04-2018 03:58 PM)Wedge Wrote:  
(03-04-2018 02:46 PM)stever20 Wrote:  I'd rather have the regular season meaningless than the postseason being a joke. In college football, the regular season is meaningful, but the post season is a joke. In college basketball regular season is meaningless, but the postseason is incredible. Give me college basketball 100% of the time.

Your justification for the college basketball postseason is, "Who cares if it's fair, what matters is that the games are entertaining." The exact same justification could be applied to the College Football Playoff, whose games have been very entertaining.

It's that everyone has a chance. Definitely not that way in college football, where for 65 teams you are done before the season.

If you give autobids to regular season champs, then everyone already has a chance -- win your conference's regular season and you're in.

What exists now is that teams who are terrible in the regular season get an undeserved second chance. Doesn't matter for any conference whose regular season champ is going to get an at-large bid anyway, but for the winners of the other 23 conferences it matters a lot. Example: Northern Kentucky's 15-3 conference regular season got them nothing. They're out and a team that was 6-12 in the regular season is still in it. Essentially, they played 30 exhibition games and then lost the only game that counted. Might as well skip the regular season and draw conference tournament seedings at random.

I don't really have a problem with the conference tournaments. I have a problem with a team that is .500 in conference and so fails to do well in the regular season, loses in the conference tournament but still gets a 3rd chance by being invited to the NCAA tourney. There are simply too many undeserving schools.

I agree that Oklahoma, Arizona State, and Syracuse should be out this year (though some brackets have all three in the field), but a team that has a poor regular season and only plays well in the conference tournament is also undeserving.
03-04-2018 09:56 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
_C2_ Offline
The King of Overanalysis
*

Posts: 19,290
Joined: Feb 2008
Reputation: 366
I Root For: Houston
Location: Zamunda
Post: #38
RE: 2018 NIT/CBI/CIT bids and declines
Blame the conferences. Conference Tournaments should only have the top 8 teams and really, top 6.
03-04-2018 10:13 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
solohawks Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 8,990
Joined: May 2008
Reputation: 272
I Root For: UNCW
Location: Wilmington, NC
Post: #39
RE: 2018 NIT/CBI/CIT bids and declines
Our beat reporter indicated Hofstra will likely take a CIT/CBI bid in order to allow their big man an extra game to break David Robinson's all time conference rebounding record
03-04-2018 11:37 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
ohio1317 Offline
Moderator
*

Posts: 5,070
Joined: Mar 2008
Reputation: 173
I Root For: Ohio State
Location:
Post: #40
RE: 2018 NIT/CBI/CIT bids and declines
Count me definitely in favor of having regular season champs and not tournament champs in automatically. I get the many reasons it won't (don't think you can even have a tournament that doesn't count against regular season games totals if the winner isn't for the NCAA Tournament), but to me, the conference champ is decided in the regular season. The conference tournaments are fun little events to end with, but not half as important.

Heck, if I had it my way, we'd have the conference tournaments as the first events of the year instead of the last, as kind of an intro to the basketball year.
03-04-2018 11:41 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)


Copyright © 2002-2018 Collegiate Sports Nation Bulletin Board System (CSNbbs), All Rights Reserved.
CSNbbs is an independent fan site and is in no way affiliated to the NCAA or any of the schools and conferences it represents.
This site monetizes links. FTC Disclosure.
We allow third-party companies to serve ads and/or collect certain anonymous information when you visit our web site. These companies may use non-personally identifiable information (e.g., click stream information, browser type, time and date, subject of advertisements clicked or scrolled over) during your visits to this and other Web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services likely to be of greater interest to you. These companies typically use a cookie or third party web beacon to collect this information. To learn more about this behavioral advertising practice or to opt-out of this type of advertising, you can visit http://www.networkadvertising.org.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2018 MyBB Group.