After the first round of the NIT, 12 of the remaining 16 teams are from P5 conferences. The others are Marquette (BE), MTSU and Western Kentucky (CUSA) and St Mary's (WCC).

The top four seeds in every bracket won their opening game. The only P5 school to lose to a non-P5 school was Boston College, and I'm not sure why the Eagles were in the field to begin with.

Why are we playing these opening round games anyway? It seems the primary reason for having a 32 team field is to give teams who won their conference regular season but lost in the tournament a chance to play on television.

(03-15-2018 09:06 AM)ken d Wrote:  After the first round of the NIT, 12 of the remaining 16 teams are from P5 conferences. The others are Marquette (BE), MTSU and Western Kentucky (CUSA) and St Mary's (WCC).

The top four seeds in every bracket won their opening game. The only P5 school to lose to a non-P5 school was Boston College, and I'm not sure why the Eagles were in the field to begin with.

Why are we playing these opening round games anyway? It seems the primary reason for having a 32 team field is to give teams who won their conference regular season but lost in the tournament a chance to play on television.

Part of it is there were so many NIT bid thieves this year. Where last year we had on the 6 line Boise St, Richmond, Georgia Tech, and UT Arlington- this year the 6 line was Louisiana, BYU, Vermont, and Rider. Pretty big difference there.

And I would disagree with you on what the purpose of the NIT is. While yes it's to give conference champions who lose in the conference tourney a place for March, that's it- a chance. But it's just as much for the next 20ish teams who don't make the NCAA tourney a chance as well.

(03-15-2018 09:06 AM)ken d Wrote:  Why are we playing these opening round games anyway? It seems the primary reason for having a 32 team field is to give teams who won their conference regular season but lost in the tournament a chance to play on television.

Because you can't play the next round until you finish the opening round?

(03-15-2018 09:30 AM)stever20 Wrote:  

(03-15-2018 09:06 AM)ken d Wrote:  After the first round of the NIT, 12 of the remaining 16 teams are from P5 conferences. The others are Marquette (BE), MTSU and Western Kentucky (CUSA) and St Mary's (WCC).

The top four seeds in every bracket won their opening game. The only P5 school to lose to a non-P5 school was Boston College, and I'm not sure why the Eagles were in the field to begin with.

Why are we playing these opening round games anyway? It seems the primary reason for having a 32 team field is to give teams who won their conference regular season but lost in the tournament a chance to play on television.

Part of it is there were so many NIT bid thieves this year. Where last year we had on the 6 line Boise St, Richmond, Georgia Tech, and UT Arlington- this year the 6 line was Louisiana, BYU, Vermont, and Rider. Pretty big difference there.

And I would disagree with you on what the purpose of the NIT is. While yes it's to give conference champions who lose in the conference tourney a place for March, that's it- a chance. But it's just as much for the next 20ish teams who don't make the NCAA tourney a chance as well.

I didn't say what the purpose of the NIT is. I suggested the purpose of having 32 teams instead of 16 was to give some teams a chance to play on television.

I'm OK with that, but I question why all the P5 schools? It's not like they don't have a chance to play in the big dance. If they want to have a secondary tournament of their own, let them play each other.

Why not limit the NIT field to schools not in the ultra rich P5?

(03-15-2018 10:19 AM)ken d Wrote:  Why not limit the NIT field to schools not in the ultra rich P5?

Come on, you know the answer to that.

(03-15-2018 10:19 AM)ken d Wrote:  

(03-15-2018 09:30 AM)stever20 Wrote:  

(03-15-2018 09:06 AM)ken d Wrote:  After the first round of the NIT, 12 of the remaining 16 teams are from P5 conferences. The others are Marquette (BE), MTSU and Western Kentucky (CUSA) and St Mary's (WCC).

The top four seeds in every bracket won their opening game. The only P5 school to lose to a non-P5 school was Boston College, and I'm not sure why the Eagles were in the field to begin with.

Why are we playing these opening round games anyway? It seems the primary reason for having a 32 team field is to give teams who won their conference regular season but lost in the tournament a chance to play on television.

Part of it is there were so many NIT bid thieves this year. Where last year we had on the 6 line Boise St, Richmond, Georgia Tech, and UT Arlington- this year the 6 line was Louisiana, BYU, Vermont, and Rider. Pretty big difference there.

And I would disagree with you on what the purpose of the NIT is. While yes it's to give conference champions who lose in the conference tourney a place for March, that's it- a chance. But it's just as much for the next 20ish teams who don't make the NCAA tourney a chance as well.

I didn't say what the purpose of the NIT is. I suggested the purpose of having 32 teams instead of 16 was to give some teams a chance to play on television.

I'm OK with that, but I question why all the P5 schools? It's not like they don't have a chance to play in the big dance. If they want to have a secondary tournament of their own, let them play each other.

Why not limit the NIT field to schools not in the ultra rich P5?

Well I imagine the NIT wants to field what they consider the strongest possible field. in the last 10 NITs, 7 of the 10 NIT champs and 14 of the 20 NIT title game participants have been from P5 conferences.

I don't know about historically, but last year they did a terrible job seeding the NIT. The final 4 in MSG was a 8 seed (Cal State Bakersfield), a 6 seed (Georgia Tech), and two 4 seeds (UCF and TCU).

Well, ahead of the takeover, the NIT was pretty much excluding any/every non-major (with the exception of the A10 and maybe a rogue MWC or CUSA member). You had majors just reaching .500 or a game above, and they were getting invited. Meanwhile, you had 20+ win non-majors sitting at home.

It's gotten better, but still far from perfect. In another thread, I listed some of those non-majors feeling the snub for majors who had much lower or questionable numbers. But the bigger gripe was how you had NIT AQ's who had better numbers who STILL weren't given the opportunity to host. And that is the part that hurts non-majors the most. Some got the rub to host at least one game, others probably won't ever.

I AM glad that this AQ thing is in place, though. Maybe Harvard doesn't belong in the NIT without one...but Vermont did. And no way do they get a sniff without this in place. Heck, look at Old Dominion...and that's a school with a basketball pulse. The committee goes and gives it to BC or LSU instead...unreal.

(03-15-2018 10:19 AM)ken d Wrote:  

(03-15-2018 09:30 AM)stever20 Wrote:  

(03-15-2018 09:06 AM)ken d Wrote:  After the first round of the NIT, 12 of the remaining 16 teams are from P5 conferences. The others are Marquette (BE), MTSU and Western Kentucky (CUSA) and St Mary's (WCC).

The top four seeds in every bracket won their opening game. The only P5 school to lose to a non-P5 school was Boston College, and I'm not sure why the Eagles were in the field to begin with.

Why are we playing these opening round games anyway? It seems the primary reason for having a 32 team field is to give teams who won their conference regular season but lost in the tournament a chance to play on television.

Part of it is there were so many NIT bid thieves this year. Where last year we had on the 6 line Boise St, Richmond, Georgia Tech, and UT Arlington- this year the 6 line was Louisiana, BYU, Vermont, and Rider. Pretty big difference there.

And I would disagree with you on what the purpose of the NIT is. While yes it's to give conference champions who lose in the conference tourney a place for March, that's it- a chance. But it's just as much for the next 20ish teams who don't make the NCAA tourney a chance as well.

I didn't say what the purpose of the NIT is. I suggested the purpose of having 32 teams instead of 16 was to give some teams a chance to play on television.

I'm OK with that, but I question why all the P5 schools? It's not like they don't have a chance to play in the big dance. If they want to have a secondary tournament of their own, let them play each other.

Why not limit the NIT field to schools not in the ultra rich P5?

They already have 2 tourneys for those teams. They're called the CBI and CIT.

The NIT has had 32 teams(at least) since 1980.

(03-15-2018 09:06 AM)ken d Wrote:  After the first round of the NIT, 12 of the remaining 16 teams are from P5 conferences. The others are Marquette (BE), MTSU and Western Kentucky (CUSA) and St Mary's (WCC).

The top four seeds in every bracket won their opening game. The only P5 school to lose to a non-P5 school was Boston College, and I'm not sure why the Eagles were in the field to begin with.

Why are we playing these opening round games anyway? It seems the primary reason for having a 32 team field is to give teams who won their conference regular season but lost in the tournament a chance to play on television.

Just LAST YEAR ---- the NIT Final Four consisted of a 4, 4, 6, and 8 seed.

Yes, the home teams went 16-0 in this year's 1st Round, but this isn't some continuation of a multi-year trend.

This tourney got ruined when NCAA bought it, use to not seed, plus the 4 quarters suck.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

The Big Dance and NIT are run by the NCAA and it rounds to one hundred teams. (68 +32 =100).

The CBI and CIT are what they are. Up and coming teams will want to keep playing and have an avenue.

People b|tch about the number of bowl games, but the BB side is a little better but not by as large as a margin as some claim.

CBI and CIT are similar to really un-attractive third tier bowl games. That said if we made a bowl game and got one of those bowls, see above comment of up and coming teams. We'd be thrilled.

(03-15-2018 11:44 AM)Jjoey52 Wrote:  This tourney got ruined when NCAA bought it, use to not seed, plus the 4 quarters suck.

How can you ruin something that was unwatchable right before the purchase?

It turned into a majors c-j before the buy. If you were from a major and weren't below .500, you're in. Utter garbage. Far better in the 90's, but then, college basketball was just better then anyway.

(03-15-2018 10:43 AM)stever20 Wrote:  

(03-15-2018 10:19 AM)ken d Wrote:  

(03-15-2018 09:30 AM)stever20 Wrote:  

(03-15-2018 09:06 AM)ken d Wrote:  After the first round of the NIT, 12 of the remaining 16 teams are from P5 conferences. The others are Marquette (BE), MTSU and Western Kentucky (CUSA) and St Mary's (WCC).

The top four seeds in every bracket won their opening game. The only P5 school to lose to a non-P5 school was Boston College, and I'm not sure why the Eagles were in the field to begin with.

Why are we playing these opening round games anyway? It seems the primary reason for having a 32 team field is to give teams who won their conference regular season but lost in the tournament a chance to play on television.

Part of it is there were so many NIT bid thieves this year. Where last year we had on the 6 line Boise St, Richmond, Georgia Tech, and UT Arlington- this year the 6 line was Louisiana, BYU, Vermont, and Rider. Pretty big difference there.

And I would disagree with you on what the purpose of the NIT is. While yes it's to give conference champions who lose in the conference tourney a place for March, that's it- a chance. But it's just as much for the next 20ish teams who don't make the NCAA tourney a chance as well.

I didn't say what the purpose of the NIT is. I suggested the purpose of having 32 teams instead of 16 was to give some teams a chance to play on television.

I'm OK with that, but I question why all the P5 schools? It's not like they don't have a chance to play in the big dance. If they want to have a secondary tournament of their own, let them play each other.

Why not limit the NIT field to schools not in the ultra rich P5?

They already have 2 tourneys for those teams. They're called the CBI and CIT.

The NIT has had 32 teams(at least) since 1980.

LMAO. Right. It is really fair to say you are from a less resourced league, so we will give you a chance to play only if you are willing to pay to enter. You missed the whole inequity element didn't you?

Maybe if the CBI or CIT merged into a Vegas tournament or other decent solid spring break location (Florida or Bahamas for 4-5 days at most in a tournament) it would be more interesting for a vacation ticket package.

The P5 were 15 of the 20 at-large. Only St. Mary's, WKU, BYU (in because Georgia declined), Boise State and Temple were Mid-Majors

Of the 12 autobids, 11 were bottom 12 seeds (exception Middle Tennessee).

The only first round "upset" was Washington, at home, a 5 seed beating Boise State a 4 seed. (Boise couldn't host due to NCAA taking place there). Pretty much all the auto bids were outmatched, save Middle Tennessee, and surprisingly UNCA - of course USC's top player declined to play in the NIT as he and his agent decided it was not worth the injury risk before the NBA draft.

The only unusual thing is the majors seemed more focused than usual. Normally half of the majors just can't get up for the NIT and exit quickly. I suspect this year it may have to do with the large number of bubble teams -- call it mediocrity perhaps -- who feel they deserve to be playing, rather than, "yeah OK were in the NIT."

It will be interesting to see if the seeding results are similar in the NCAA. The 12-16 seeds are all Mid-Major autobids. At least half will be blown out (like last year) -- you just hope you catch a major whose players are looking past you and giving only half an effort, sloppy as hell.

I think one thing maybe a factor with the NIT results is the longer 3 point shot...

I do feel like the 6 and 7 lines this year were much weaker than last year.

Last couple of years NIT Final 4s.

2017: Cal State-Bakersfield, TCU (winner), UCF, Ga Tech
2016: Valpo, San Diego State, GWU (winner), BYU
2015: Temple, Miami (FL), Stanford (winner), Old Dominion


It looks like, historically, that non P5 teams tend to do reasonably well in the NIT. This year might be like 2014, when it was a P5 heavy affair.

(03-15-2018 11:44 AM)Jjoey52 Wrote:  This tourney got ruined when NCAA bought it, use to not seed, plus the 4 quarters suck.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

I love the 4 quarters