Jump to content
UofMTigers

should the NIT be expanded to 64 teams?

Should the NIT be expanded to 64 teams?  

49 members have voted

  1. 1. Should the NIT be expanded to 64 teams?

    • yes, expand to 64 teams
    • No, leave it at 32 teams


Recommended Posts

31 minutes ago, UofMTigers said:

after beating Gonzaga I'm starting to think BYU may be an NCAA squad...win a couple games in Las Vegas and who knows...

They will have to win the conference tourney.  They have three losses to absolutely terrible teams.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The paucity of votes in this poll can be interpreted as a sign that almost nobody here thinks expanding the NIT would be a good idea.

For my money, if Memphis and UNLV both can't manage to get an invite to the NCAAs or the NIT one of these years, they should just play each other in a best two out of three to decide which one of the football-is-an-afterthought schools was the least lousy in hoops that season.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, UofMTigers said:

after beating Gonzaga I'm starting to think BYU may be an NCAA squad...win a couple games in Las Vegas and who knows...

We have had too many bad losses this year.  I mean, RPI 200+ losses; like four or five of them.

The only way we get in is if we win the conf tourney, which would mean beating two ranked teams in two days.

Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, ph90702 said:

One thing I would like to see is conference regular reason champions not getting auto bids to the NIT.  They should get auto bids to the NCAAs.

Rack that take.  The regular season in a basketball league should mean something.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Jack Bauer said:

Rack that take.  The regular season in a basketball league should mean something.

Same. Not just because Nevada has a good shot at it either. It just makes sense that the regular season champ should make the tourney.

I do like how exciting it can make cconference tourneys though so it's tough.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Since the NCAA took over in 2005, the NIT is usually only filled with P5 underperformers and mid-major regular season champions who didnt win their conference tournament.  For most mid-majors it is impossible to make it to NIT as an at-large as shitty P5 schools seem to have better RPIs just because of their conference association.  In most of those mid-major conferences, the #2 team(usually with 20+ wins) is playing in the CIT even though they can beat half of the NIT field handily.  The CIT(a mid-major only tournament) was actually created because of the NCAA's bias towards shitty P5 teams.  If the NCAA expanded the NIT to 64 and gave each conference an autobid, the CIT would likely shut down.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, dpc8302 said:

Since the NCAA took over in 2005, the NIT is usually only filled with P5 underperformers and mid-major regular season champions who didnt win their conference tournament.  For most mid-majors it is impossible to make it to NIT as an at-large as shitty P5 schools seem to have better RPIs just because of their conference association.  In most of those mid-major conferences, the #2 team(usually with 20+ wins) is playing in the CIT even though they can beat half of the NIT field handily.  The CIT(a mid-major only tournament) was actually created because of the NCAA's bias towards shitty P5 teams.  If the NCAA expanded the NIT to 64 and gave each conference an autobid, the CIT would likely shut down.

 

Eh, there were 17 at large bids last year and that's not counting teams like SDSU, Valpo and Monmouth who would have qualified otherwise without the automatic rule.

9 were from the big 6 major conferences, 8 weren't. I honestly find the whining from mid major fans about bias to be BS

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, clsports01 said:

Still awaiting the men's post-season NIT to expand to 64 teams, just like the women's NIT did in 2010.  Change the CBI to include any remaining good teams from division I or II, or just get rid of the CBI to simplify the entire post-season.

Why? Is it too complicated for you?

  • Facepalm 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/27/2017 at 8:43 AM, sebasour said:

 

Eh, there were 17 at large bids last year and that's not counting teams like SDSU, Valpo and Monmouth who would have qualified otherwise without the automatic rule.

9 were from the big 6 major conferences, 8 weren't. I honestly find the whining from mid major fans about bias to be BS

 

One of those at-large NIT bids in 2016 went to Long Beach State.  So it can be done.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Mike Bronson would expand it.  It would give the Mwc some ESPN exposure.  2-3 teams would make the field in any given year.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.




×
×
  • Create New...