NIT Postseason Tournament Selection Process Changes to further benefit top leagues

[RF1]

The NIT postseason tournament has gone through a series of changes in the years since it was taken over by the NIT. The field was reduced to 32 and a more structured selection process with seeding was introduced. It also later guaranteed a bid to any conference regular season champion that failed to win its league tournament with an automatic berth to the NCAA Tournament. This was a big deal to smaller conferences. More recently the NIT stopped hosted in final four at its longtime home of MSG in NYC.

It is now being reported that the NIT is about to reverse its guaranteed bid selection for regular season champions. In its place, the NIT will now guarantee a minimum TWO bids to six conferences (Atlantic Coast, Big East, Big Ten, Big 12, Pac-12 and Southeastern) regardless of won/loss record. The remainder (20 teams) of the field will be selected at an at large basis.

This is just another step in consolidating power among just a few conferences and follows what has been happening in recent years with the NCAA selection process. This is bad news for any team outside the membership of the top six leagues. We are now nearing the point where nearly EVERY team from a select few conference will be basically guaranteed a postseason appearance.

[ramster]

Yeah,
I'd read about it on the Friar Board a short while ago

Read the replies to Goodman's thread.....

And see how home games are assigned.

Just more separation of the P5's from the Mid and Low Majors.

Funny how the Big East is included but no other conference.

Eventually the P5 Football Schools who run the show will chip away at the Big East as well. Already started with the cancellation of the Gavitt Games.
$45 to $80 million per year per school dwarfs the $4 million per year the BE schools get currently.

UCONN can't sit back for too long with that annual differential. Either stay in BE and go FCS Football like Georgetown, Villanova or go P5 Football and all sports.

[Jersey77]

The NIT postseason tournament has gone through a series of changes in the years since it was taken over by the NIT. The field was reduced to 32 and a more structured selection process with seeding was introduced. It also later guaranteed a bid to any conference regular season champion that failed to win its league tournament with an automatic berth to the NCAA Tournament. This was a big deal to smaller conferences. More recently the NIT stopped hosted in final four at its longtime home of MSG in NYC.

It is now being reported that the NIT is about to reverse its guaranteed bid selection for regular season champions. In its place, the NIT will now guarantee a minimum TWO bids to six conferences (Atlantic Coast, Big East, Big Ten, Big 12, Pac-12 and Southeastern). The remainder (20 teams) of the field will be selected at an at large basis.

This is just another step in consolidating power among just a few conferences and follows what has been happening in recent years with the NCAA selection process. This is bad news for any team outside the membership of the top six leagues.

It just keeps getting worse for the mid-majors, total BS.
Not only do the P6 schools get guaranteed 2 bids regardless of how good they are or their record, but they get to host the 1st round games.
So these conferences that may have 8 or 9 NCAA bids also get a minimum of 2 more to the NIT.

.

[rjsuperfly66]

I agree with the premise it's advantage to power conference teams but mid-majors will likely see a benefit as well. Many of these power conference programs were already in the NIT, the difference is more of them would get home games. Getting rid of the auto-bids hurts low-majors and opens up another 8-12 NIT spots. Yes, some go to P6 teams, but certainly opens the door for AAC, A10, to also get additional bids.

[ramster]

NIT Changes:

For the 2024 NIT, conference regular season champions that do not win their conference tournament or are not otherwise selected to the NCAA Division I Men’s Basketball Championship will not receive an automatic bid to the NIT.  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. 

Once the 12 automatic qualifying schools have been selected, the NIT Committee will select the 20 best teams available to complete the tournament’s 32-team field.  Based on the NIT Committee’s evaluation, the best four teams of the 20 at-large teams selected will complete the 16 first round hosts, with deference given to the “first four teams out” of the Division I Men’s Basketball Championship, as determined by the NCAA Division I Men’s Basketball.  Additional teams from the six conferences with AQs are eligible to be selected as at-large teams and can be selected as hosts.

[theblueram]

Best thing would be all non P5 schools just refuse an invite. All of them, collectively. It's not like any school makes money off this crap tournament.

[ramster]

I agree with the premise it's advantage to power conference teams but mid-majors will likely see a benefit as well. Many of these power conference programs were already in the NIT, the difference is more of them would get home games. Getting rid of the auto-bids hurts low-majors and opens up another 8-12 NIT spots. Yes, some go to P6 teams, but certainly opens the door for AAC, A10, to also get additional bids.

Did you read the replies in Goodman's thread?
One mid major AD pissed that P5's will get to host, and P5's are getting tons of Media NIL money but Mid Majors who win their Conference Championship will have to pay to travel to P6 Team Arenas.

This is just another swipe at non P5 Basketball Programs and non P5 Conferences. Football Money from Media Deals getting more and more influential - and quickly.

[ramster]

Best thing would be all non P5 schools just refuse an invite. All of them, collectively. It's not like any school makes money off this crap tournament.

Just what the P5's would like.
NIT composed of mostly all P5 schools. Then no need to worry about getting embarrassed by Mid Majors that could impact their NET.
Eventually merge the NIT to NCAA for 90+ teams but with minimal Mid Majors.

[rjsuperfly66]

NIT Changes:

For the 2024 NIT, conference regular season champions that do not win their conference tournament or are not otherwise selected to the NCAA Division I Men’s Basketball Championship will not receive an automatic bid to the NIT.  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. 

Once the 12 automatic qualifying schools have been selected, the NIT Committee will select the 20 best teams available to complete the tournament’s 32-team field.  Based on the NIT Committee’s evaluation, the best four teams of the 20 at-large teams selected will complete the 16 first round hosts, with deference given to the “first four teams out” of the Division I Men’s Basketball Championship, as determined by the NCAA Division I Men’s Basketball.  Additional teams from the six conferences with AQs are eligible to be selected as at-large teams and can be selected as hosts.

This makes so little of a difference, but it will be turned into a mountain. Last year, the Big 10, Big 12, SEC, and PAC-12 all had at least 2 teams with top 4 seeds hosting NIT games (Notes: Big 10 had 3; I moved teams into their current conference). ACC had 1 home, and another on the road (although UNC did also turn down a bid). Big East had 2 on the road. So the real difference is that those teams would shift from road to home games, and UAB, Liberty, and Sam Houston would shift to road games. Youngstown St, Eastern Washington, Alcorn, UC-Irvine, Bradley, Hofstra, Utah Valley, Morehead St, Southern Miss, Yale, and Toledo would lose their automatic status and would now have to qualify on their resume. Those 10 spots would now become up-for-grab. Figure some certainly go to P6, but they would be available to all.

[rjsuperfly66]

I agree with the premise it's advantage to power conference teams but mid-majors will likely see a benefit as well. Many of these power conference programs were already in the NIT, the difference is more of them would get home games. Getting rid of the auto-bids hurts low-majors and opens up another 8-12 NIT spots. Yes, some go to P6 teams, but certainly opens the door for AAC, A10, to also get additional bids.

Did you read the replies in Goodman's thread?
One mid major AD pissed that P5's will get to host, and P5's are getting tons of Media NIL money but Mid Majors who win their Conference Championship will have to pay to travel to P6 Team Arenas.

This is just another swipe at non P5 Basketball Programs and non P5 Conferences. Football Money from Media Deals getting more and more influential - and quickly.

See other response - In last years field it would have impacted 3 teams, and arguably 2 had UNC not turned down their bid. So 10 of 12 already had home-court in the NIT. All conferences had at least 2 bids.

[ramster]

I agree with the premise it's advantage to power conference teams but mid-majors will likely see a benefit as well. Many of these power conference programs were already in the NIT, the difference is more of them would get home games. Getting rid of the auto-bids hurts low-majors and opens up another 8-12 NIT spots. Yes, some go to P6 teams, but certainly opens the door for AAC, A10, to also get additional bids.

Did you read the replies in Goodman's thread?
One mid major AD pissed that P5's will get to host, and P5's are getting tons of Media NIL money but Mid Majors who win their Conference Championship will have to pay to travel to P6 Team Arenas.

This is just another swipe at non P5 Basketball Programs and non P5 Conferences. Football Money from Media Deals getting more and more influential - and quickly.

See other response - In last years field it would have impacted 3 teams, and arguably 2 had UNC not turned down their bid. So 10 of 12 already had home-court in the NIT. All conferences had at least 2 bids.

So why change it?

And what about the home court favoritism?

[rjsuperfly66]

Did you read the replies in Goodman's thread?
One mid major AD pissed that P5's will get to host, and P5's are getting tons of Media NIL money but Mid Majors who win their Conference Championship will have to pay to travel to P6 Team Arenas.

This is just another swipe at non P5 Basketball Programs and non P5 Conferences. Football Money from Media Deals getting more and more influential - and quickly.

See other response - In last years field it would have impacted 3 teams, and arguably 2 had UNC not turned down their bid. So 10 of 12 already had home-court in the NIT. All conferences had at least 2 bids.

So why change it?

And what about the home court favoritism?

My guess - there was advanced talks of multiple power conference leagues going to create their own postseason tournament with Fox, and this gives them more ammo as being power-conference friendly.

That said, I find the home-court angle so overplayed in this. The damage is to the low-majors who lose their autobid status as regular season conference winners. Power conferences will see the biggest advantage from that, but it's still more opportunities for mid-majors.

[ramster]

See other response - In last years field it would have impacted 3 teams, and arguably 2 had UNC not turned down their bid. So 10 of 12 already had home-court in the NIT. All conferences had at least 2 bids.

So why change it?

And what about the home court favoritism?

My guess - there was advanced talks of multiple power conference leagues going to create their own postseason tournament with Fox, and this gives them more ammo as being power-conference friendly.

That said, I find the home-court angle so overplayed in this. The damage is to the low-majors who lose their autobid status as regular season conference winners. Power conferences will see the biggest advantage from that, but it's still more opportunities for mid-majors.

Yep. It's brutal to the Conference Champions who coild easily win their Conference Championship, have an off game in the Conference Tournament and then could now get nudged out by a below .500 P5 school.
Terrible change.

And these mid and low level Conference Teams are already getting raped and pillaged by P5 Schools recruiting their best players using their huge Media Funded War Chests to Pay for Play. Now let's just further kick them while they are down.

[RF1]

I thought I would take a look at how this would have affected the 2023 NIT.

There were 11 automatic bids (with NET rank) give out:
Utah Valley (58)
Yale (65)
Bradley (78)
Toledo (82)
Hofstra (85)
Southern Miss (90)
UC-Irvine (102)
EWU (120)
Youngstown State (127)
Morehead St (219)
Alcorn State (245)

There were 21 at a large selections (with NET rank) [with top 6 conf]

North Texas (30)
UAB (39)
Rutgers (40) [Big Ten]
Okl State (42) [Big 12]
Oregon (45) [PAC-12]
Liberty (46)
Michigan (57) [Big Ten]
Cincinnati (63)
New Mexico (64)
UCF (66)
Clemson (67) [ACC]
Sam Houston (69)
Villanova (71) [BE]
Wisconsin (72) [Big Ten]
Florida (73) [SEC]
Seton Hall (74) [BE]
Va Tech (75) [ACC]
Colorado (76) [SEC]
Wash St (79) [Pac-12]
Vanderbilt (81) [SEC]
Santa Clara (87)




Five of the eleven guaranteed bid invitees most likely would not have been in the NIT (all below the Southern Miss with 90 NET). The Big 12 was the only top six conference not to have sent a team to the NIT last year. Had the new criteria been used, Texas Tech with an NET of 62 and a record of 16-16 would have made the field.

As for the effect on the A-10, it likely would not had an impact last season. Dayton, which turned down an NIT bid, would probably have still been the only A-10 member to have qualified for the NIT field.

[rjsuperfly66]

So why change it?

And what about the home court favoritism?

My guess - there was advanced talks of multiple power conference leagues going to create their own postseason tournament with Fox, and this gives them more ammo as being power-conference friendly.

That said, I find the home-court angle so overplayed in this. The damage is to the low-majors who lose their autobid status as regular season conference winners. Power conferences will see the biggest advantage from that, but it's still more opportunities for mid-majors.

Yep. It's brutal to the Conference Champions who could now get nudged out by a below .500 P5 school.
Terrible change.

So here is the other side of it - Does anyone, outside of those in Ohio, really giving a flying flip about Youngstown St being the 8 seed in the NIT? Is fan interest for a home team high because they are in the NIT trying to sell tickets to Youngstown St.? At least sub-.500 power conference team has a name that might attract a few extra hundred ticket sales.

[ramster]

My guess - there was advanced talks of multiple power conference leagues going to create their own postseason tournament with Fox, and this gives them more ammo as being power-conference friendly.

That said, I find the home-court angle so overplayed in this. The damage is to the low-majors who lose their autobid status as regular season conference winners. Power conferences will see the biggest advantage from that, but it's still more opportunities for mid-majors.

Yep. It's brutal to the Conference Champions who could now get nudged out by a below .500 P5 school.
Terrible change.

So here is the other side of it - Does anyone, outside of those in Ohio, really giving a flying flip about Youngstown St being the 8 seed in the NIT? Is fan interest for a home team high because they are in the NIT trying to sell tickets to Youngstown St.? At least sub-.500 power conference team has a name that might attract a few extra hundred ticket sales.

It's not at all about ticket sales

It's got everything to do with power and media money.

RJ,
Are you reading the reactions to this change? It's brutal what fans are saying about this change negatively impacting mid and low majors. You are a very small minority seeming to like this change.

[rjsuperfly66]

Yep. It's brutal to the Conference Champions who could now get nudged out by a below .500 P5 school.
Terrible change.

So here is the other side of it - Does anyone, outside of those in Ohio, really giving a flying flip about Youngstown St being the 8 seed in the NIT? Is fan interest for a home team high because they are in the NIT trying to sell tickets to Youngstown St.? At least sub-.500 power conference team has a name that might attract a few extra hundred ticket sales.

It's not at all about ticket sales

It's got everything to do with power and media money.

RJ,
Are you reading the reactions to this change? It's brutal what fans are saying about this change negatively impacting mid and low majors. You are a very small minority seeming to like this change.

Don't get me wrong, I don't think I like it, but I do think it's getting blown very out of proportion. I don't find whatever the issue is to be overly significant. I also can't tell you the last time I watched an NIT game. Yes, it's certainly about power. But they drive the bus. And there really isn't a compelling argument for why we should cry about some 8-seeded auto NIT team being dropped over then "the big bad P6 are at it again."

[adam914]

I'm not a fan of this change really, if it were up to me I would not do it, but at the same time while I don't like it I have a hard time getting too worked up about it. The NIT simply isn't what it used to be. Outside of URI being in it, I couldn't tell you the last time I even watched an NIT game and I'm about as big of a college hoops fan as there is. My guess is this change won't end up being as big of a deal as it feels like right now.

[ramster]

Agree with you Adam, but then why change it in the first place?
It's just another in a continuing list that negatively impacts mid and low majors. Is it big, huge? No.
But it all adds up.

[ramster]

I thought I would take a look at how this would have affected the 2023 NIT.

There were 11 automatic bids (with NET rank) give out:
Utah Valley (58)
Yale (65)
Bradley (78)
Toledo (82)
Hofstra (85)
Southern Miss (90)
UC-Irvine (102)
EWU (120)
Youngstown State (127)
Morehead St (219)
Alcorn State (245)

There were 21 at a large selections (with NET rank) [with top 6 conf]

North Texas (30)
UAB (39)
Rutgers (40) [Big Ten]
Okl State (42) [Big 12]
Oregon (45) [PAC-12]
Liberty (46)
Michigan (57) [Big Ten]
Cincinnati (63)
New Mexico (64)
UCF (66)
Clemson (67) [ACC]
Sam Houston (69)
Villanova (71) [BE]
Wisconsin (72) [Big Ten]
Florida (73) [SEC]
Seton Hall (74) [BE]
Va Tech (75) [ACC]
Colorado (76) [SEC]
Wash St (79) [Pac-12]
Vanderbilt (81) [SEC]
Santa Clara (87)




Five of the eleven guaranteed bid invitees most likely would not would have been in the NIT (all below the Southern Miss with 90 NET). The Big 12 was the only top six conference not to have sent a team to the NIT last year. Had the new criteria been used, Texas Tech with an NET of 62 and a record of 16-16 would have made the field.

As for the effect on the A-10, it likely would not had an impact. Dayton, which turned down an NIT bid, would probably have still been the only A-10 to have qualified for the NIT field.

RF1,

How many Conference Champions regular season (and who were they) lost in their Conference Championship game, got an auto invite to the NIT but would NOT have gotten an NIT invite under this new change?

And how many of those would have warranted a NIT home game but in the new rules would have to travel to a P6 Site now?

Last season A10 got only VCU in the NCAA Tournament - VCU won the Conference and the Conference Tournament. Dayton turned down the NIT invite supposedly. If Dayton had taken the invite would they have hosted a 1st round NIT game based on being a 1 or 2 seed?

If Dayton upset VCU, would VCU have hosted a NIT game based on NIT Seed? And in new rule would VCU have had to travel to a P5 Arena? See where I'm going?

[rjsuperfly66]

Agree with you Adam, but then why change it in the first place?
It's just another in a continuing list that negatively impacts mid and low majors. Is it big, huge? No.
But it all adds up.

Can you tell me how this impacts mid-majors? Yes, there is the potential scenario where an A10 team gets bumped from a home game to a road game because they weren't one of the best of the non-p6 schools.

But the extra 10 bids that open up, those are up-for-grabs for the A10, the AAC, etc. Yes, some, if not most of them, might go to P6 schools. But if your conference gets an additional team or 2 in, at expense of the occasionally screwing of a home game, I would still call that a value add.

Further, I think somewhere you commented about home-court favoritism. You and I both know that a P6 HCA is minimal at best for an NIT game. It's a home-game for the fans but doesn't come with much of fan energy.

[adam914]

Agree with you Adam, but then why change it in the first place?
It's just another in a continuing list that negatively impacts mid and low majors. Is it big, huge? No.
But it all adds up.

I don't know the ultimate reason for the change, but if I had to guess it's probably a bit of an overreaction from the NIT because they also see that the tournament just isn't all that important anymore and are trying to find ways to change that. Not that I think this will do that, but I'm just trying to guess at what they might be thinking. It could also be partly because of that other new Fox tournament that they are trying to get going.

[ramster]

Andy Katz
@TheAndyKatz
Some context on the NIT announcement: The changes (guaranteeing two bids for the power six leagues and no more automatic bids in the 32-team field) were made as a direct result of the competitive threat of a Fox postseason event for 2024 or '25 with the Big East, Big Ten, Big 12, Pac-12 (for now), ACC and SEC to take teams that don't make the NCAAs. The NIT's deal with ESPN ends after 2024 event. If you apply this new format to the 2023 field, only five teams from one-bid leagues wouldn't have made it. They could still make the field as at-large selections. Also, the move from MSG last year (to Las Vegas and this year to Hinkle) wasn't a shock. MSG is looking for sold-out events for that time period in late March.

[rhodysurf]

Agree with you Adam, but then why change it in the first place?
It's just another in a continuing list that negatively impacts mid and low majors. Is it big, huge? No.
But it all adds up.

Can you tell me how this impacts mid-majors? Yes, there is the potential scenario where an A10 team gets bumped from a home game to a road game because they weren't one of the best of the non-p6 schools.

But the extra 10 bids that open up, those are up-for-grabs for the A10, the AAC, etc. Yes, some, if not most of them, might go to P6 schools. But if your conference gets an additional team or 2 in, at expense of the occasionally screwing of a home game, I would still call that a value add.

Further, I think somewhere you commented about home-court favoritism. You and I both know that a P6 HCA is minimal at best for an NIT game. It's a home-game for the fans but doesn't come with much of fan energy.

The real reasons everyone is reacting so strongly is that this is definitely the first time that it has been codified in for an NCAA event that the power conferences (fully specified) gets different treatment than the rest of the conferences.

It’s not that hard to draw a line from this to changing the NCAA tournament to not give auto bids except from these specific conferences, or to guarantee however many bids from these specific conferences. It’s fucking stupid and against why college basketball is interesting. the power conferences will kill this sport.

[rjsuperfly66]

Agree with you Adam, but then why change it in the first place?
It's just another in a continuing list that negatively impacts mid and low majors. Is it big, huge? No.
But it all adds up.

Can you tell me how this impacts mid-majors? Yes, there is the potential scenario where an A10 team gets bumped from a home game to a road game because they weren't one of the best of the non-p6 schools.

But the extra 10 bids that open up, those are up-for-grabs for the A10, the AAC, etc. Yes, some, if not most of them, might go to P6 schools. But if your conference gets an additional team or 2 in, at expense of the occasionally screwing of a home game, I would still call that a value add.

Further, I think somewhere you commented about home-court favoritism. You and I both know that a P6 HCA is minimal at best for an NIT game. It's a home-game for the fans but doesn't come with much of fan energy.

The real reasons everyone is reacting so strongly is that this is definitely the first time that it has been codified in for an NCAA event that the power conferences (fully specified) gets different treatment than the rest of the conferences.

It’s not that hard to draw a line from this to changing the NCAA tournament to not give auto bids except from these specific conferences, or to guarantee however many bids from these specific conferences. It’s fucking stupid and against why college basketball is interesting. the power conferences will kill this sport.

Sure, but also, who really cares about the NIT? Unless you are a fan of a team in it, there is minimal interest. You've had an increasing number of programs declining invites, NIT is an experimental ground for random potential rule changes, you've had talks about a power conference split to a different tournament. So you throw them a bone in the virtually meaningless NIT to try to keep them happy. Yes, it's no surprise, the power conferences have... power. I'm a traditionalist, I hate expansion and changes. But I think this is still a mountain being made out of a mole hill.

[NYGFan_Section208]

Who really cares about the "Not In Tournament" tournament any more?

[Rhode_Island_Red]

Andy Katz
@TheAndyKatz
Some context on the NIT announcement: The changes (guaranteeing two bids for the power six leagues and no more automatic bids in the 32-team field) were made as a direct result of the competitive threat of a Fox postseason event for 2024 or '25 with the Big East, Big Ten, Big 12, Pac-12 (for now), ACC and SEC to take teams that don't make the NCAAs. The NIT's deal with ESPN ends after 2024 event. If you apply this new format to the 2023 field, only five teams from one-bid leagues wouldn't have made it. They could still make the field as at-large selections. Also, the move from MSG last year (to Las Vegas and this year to Hinkle) wasn't a shock. MSG is looking for sold-out events for that time period in late March.

Obvious nepotism hire Dan Gavitt has one job: keep the Cartel pacified so they don't break off from the NCAA. That Fox tournament would be another step toward that separation.

[SGreenwell]

I kind of agree with RJ in that I don't think this changes the NIT in a practical way that much. I suppose I'm just more mystified about why they would do this, when power conference teams have never cared less about playing in the NIT then now. I think its way more likely that a conference champion from a small conference would give a crap and provide a decent game, vs. the 9th place team from the Big 10. Maybe you get a slightly better raw attendance number or TV rating from the latter school, but it strikes me as penny wise and pound foolish.

[RF1]

This may not dramatically change the NIT but it is the most overt action yet taken by the NCAA to outright publicly favor certain conferences and their teams. These leagues and their teams already had many baked in under the surface advantages (fixed NET, money, schedules, etc...) before this change and certainly did not need more. The NCAA has now made a blatant move to openly disregard any perceived sense of fairness and equity by guaranteeing select conferences certain bids for their teams regardless of their records and merit. This is an ominous step for the future direction of the NCAA.

[Jersey77]

I kind of agree with RJ in that I don't think this changes the NIT in a practical way that much. I suppose I'm just more mystified about why they would do this, when power conference teams have never cared less about playing in the NIT then now. I think its way more likely that a conference champion from a small conference would give a crap and provide a decent game, vs. the 9th place team from the Big 10. Maybe you get a slightly better raw attendance number or TV rating from the latter school, but it strikes me as penny wise and pound foolish.

My biggest gripe is that it is giving distinct preferential treatment to the P6 conferences in the selection process, regardless of how deserving some of those schools are.
As if the playing field within and regulated by NCAA is not already uneven enough.
To many mid-major programs the NIT is probably all they can hope for and gives those schools which had a good and successful season a chance to get some national recognition.

[RamStock]

Who really cares about the "Not In Tournament" tournament any more?

Agree. If you don’t make the NCAA tournament your year is over. No one follows this tournament

[ramster]

Who really cares about the "Not In Tournament" tournament any more?

Agree. If you don’t make the NCAA tournament your year is over. No one follows this tournament

Well it certainly looks like the P6 Conferences care. They want to get more P6 Teams in the NIT at the expense of Mid Majors who win their Conference but lose in the Conference Tournament. Plus the P6 Conferences want games played on their home courts whether deserved or not.

Imagine VCU goes 15-3 in A10 solidly in 1st place. They lose in the Conference Tournament. NIT selection committee has to take 2 teams from each P6 Conference that don't make the NCAA. This could be a (5-15) Big 10 Team. VCU gets no invite, no Automatic Invite as they would today having won the Conference.

Conference Championship means less. A lot more rides on the Conference Tournament.

[rjv]

Here is my question...
Do you believe that the NCAA will ever eliminate the automatic bid to the conferences that do not have conference tournament or modify who gets the automatic bid. I believe someone said earlier something to the fact that that the NIT is a testing ground for future NCAA actions

[ramster]

Here is my question...
Do you believe that the NCAA will ever eliminate the automatic bid to the conferences that do not have conference tournament or modify who gets the automatic bid. I believe someone said earlier something to the fact that that the NIT is a testing ground for future NCAA actions

Yes. They could have lower level conferences not get bids. Look at ultimately at least 2 levels like Football is today.

Keep in mind the NCAA does not run the FBS Football Playoffs. They are not involved.

P5's could take over running Basketball and yank it away from the NCAA. Media money is king.

[Roz]

The best part of NCAA football and bball is the chance for the little guy upsetting the P5's.

[rjsuperfly66]

I kind of agree with RJ in that I don't think this changes the NIT in a practical way that much. I suppose I'm just more mystified about why they would do this, when power conference teams have never cared less about playing in the NIT then now. I think its way more likely that a conference champion from a small conference would give a crap and provide a decent game, vs. the 9th place team from the Big 10. Maybe you get a slightly better raw attendance number or TV rating from the latter school, but it strikes me as penny wise and pound foolish.

I'm guessing in this there is a wink and a nod that all power conference teams will participate, bucking the trends of recent years with a handful of teams every year declining bids. Is the NIT more compelling with a UNC, Duke, or Kentucky in it, rather than those teams just saying screw it in recent years? Of course. And since they are seen as trend-setters, only a matter of time until more quality teams said screw it relegating the NIT to a better version of the CBI. They may have some NBA talent that draws some viewers, program prestige of course may drive some interest. No one cares about these low-majors losing auto bids, from a fan interest in the tournament perspective.

[Jdrums#3]

Here is my question...
Do you believe that the NCAA will ever eliminate the automatic bid to the conferences that do not have conference tournament or modify who gets the automatic bid. I believe someone said earlier something to the fact that that the NIT is a testing ground for future NCAA actions

Yes. They could have lower level conferences not get bids. Look at ultimately at least 2 levels like Football is today.

Keep in mind the NCAA does not run the FBS Football Playoffs. They are not involved.

P5's could take over running Basketball and yank it away from the NCAA. Media money is king.

Ramster, this is the goal, imho. Their (P5) M.O. is maximize revenue for themselves. Their first priority is maximizing football revenue and their next priority will be to maximize basketball revenue in whatever way makes the most sense for them. If the NCAA (and the NCAAT) doesn’t fall in line with what the P5 want then the P5 will breakaway.

[rhodysurf]

Can you tell me how this impacts mid-majors? Yes, there is the potential scenario where an A10 team gets bumped from a home game to a road game because they weren't one of the best of the non-p6 schools.

But the extra 10 bids that open up, those are up-for-grabs for the A10, the AAC, etc. Yes, some, if not most of them, might go to P6 schools. But if your conference gets an additional team or 2 in, at expense of the occasionally screwing of a home game, I would still call that a value add.

Further, I think somewhere you commented about home-court favoritism. You and I both know that a P6 HCA is minimal at best for an NIT game. It's a home-game for the fans but doesn't come with much of fan energy.

The real reasons everyone is reacting so strongly is that this is definitely the first time that it has been codified in for an NCAA event that the power conferences (fully specified) gets different treatment than the rest of the conferences.

It’s not that hard to draw a line from this to changing the NCAA tournament to not give auto bids except from these specific conferences, or to guarantee however many bids from these specific conferences. It’s fucking stupid and against why college basketball is interesting. the power conferences will kill this sport.

Sure, but also, who really cares about the NIT? Unless you are a fan of a team in it, there is minimal interest. You've had an increasing number of programs declining invites, NIT is an experimental ground for random potential rule changes, you've had talks about a power conference split to a different tournament. So you throw them a bone in the virtually meaningless NIT to try to keep them happy. Yes, it's no surprise, the power conferences have... power. I'm a traditionalist, I hate expansion and changes. But I think this is still a mountain being made out of a mole hill.

I don’t care about the NIT. I am worried about this being a slippery slope to becoming the same stupid system FBS football is

[RhowdyRam02]

I kind of agree with RJ in that I don't think this changes the NIT in a practical way that much. I suppose I'm just more mystified about why they would do this, when power conference teams have never cared less about playing in the NIT then now. I think its way more likely that a conference champion from a small conference would give a crap and provide a decent game, vs. the 9th place team from the Big 10. Maybe you get a slightly better raw attendance number or TV rating from the latter school, but it strikes me as penny wise and pound foolish.

I'm guessing in this there is a wink and a nod that all power conference teams will participate, bucking the trends of recent years with a handful of teams every year declining bids. Is the NIT more compelling with a UNC, Duke, or Kentucky in it, rather than those teams just saying screw it in recent years? Of course. And since they are seen as trend-setters, only a matter of time until more quality teams said screw it relegating the NIT to a better version of the CBI. They may have some NBA talent that draws some viewers, program prestige of course may drive some interest. No one cares about these low-majors losing auto bids, from a fan interest in the tournament perspective.

There is no general fan interest in the NIT, all general interest is focused on the NCAA tournament.

All NIT interest is driven by fans of the participating schools. The problem with doing what is happening here is you're adding schools who feel the NIT is beneath them and dropping schools that would actually care.

The reason UNC, Duke and Kentucky are not playing in your example is their fans don't care about the NIT. This does nothing to change fan interest for those schools

[section(105)]

So those level programs will say no thanks to the invites?

[RamStock]

Who really cares about the "Not In Tournament" tournament any more?

Agree. If you don’t make the NCAA tournament your year is over. No one follows this tournament

Well it certainly looks like the P6 Conferences care. They want to get more P6 Teams in the NIT at the expense of Mid Majors who win their Conference but lose in the Conference Tournament. Plus the P6 Conferences want games played on their home courts whether deserved or not.

Imagine VCU goes 15-3 in A10 solidly in 1st place. They lose in the Conference Tournament. NIT selection committee has to take 2 teams from each P6 Conference that don't make the NCAA. This could be a (5-15) Big 10 Team. VCU gets no invite, no Automatic Invite as they would today having won the Conference.

Conference Championship means less. A lot more rides on the Conference Tournament.

I think if this scenario happen to VCU or URI for that matter the program and fans of the team would be more upset that they lost and weren’t going to the NCAA tournament than they would be about not making the NIT. I get where you are going with it, but just hard to care about the NIT if it felt like you were making the tourney all season

[rhodyrudder]

Here is my question...
Do you believe that the NCAA will ever eliminate the automatic bid to the conferences that do not have conference tournament or modify who gets the automatic bid. I believe someone said earlier something to the fact that that the NIT is a testing ground for future NCAA actions

Yes. They could have lower level conferences not get bids. Look at ultimately at least 2 levels like Football is today.

Keep in mind the NCAA does not run the FBS Football Playoffs. They are not involved.

P5's could take over running Basketball and yank it away from the NCAA. Media money is king.

Why is it 68?
So the p5 can have more invites.
Soon it will be 90+, but only schools from p5 will be in the main draw. The others will play off for a couple of spots…
You’ll have to win 2 games on Monday Tuesday and Wednesday just to face the #1 seed on Thursday…
Non p5 means you don’t exist.
This will not end well.

[RF1]