NIT removes conference champ autobids, gives 12 autobids to "Power 6" conferences instead
- Thread starter FeralFelidae
- Start date
I'm with you on this, the auto bid for the small conferences gave those teams something to play for if they lost their conference tourney. Of course, since two mid-majors made the final last year, the powers that be had to take it away.
Too bad. North Texas beating UAB in the championship must have horrified them.
Of course, North Texas beat Wisconsin in the semifinals and Oklahoma State prior to that.
UAB beat Utah Valley in the semis, after beating Vanderbilt, who beat Michigan.
The only way to stop the little guys is to prevent them from playing.
What they really don't like is the proof that lesser conference champs are often as good as Power 6 bubble teams.
Of course, North Texas beat Wisconsin in the semifinals and Oklahoma State prior to that.
UAB beat Utah Valley in the semis, after beating Vanderbilt, who beat Michigan.
The only way to stop the little guys is to prevent them from playing.
What they really don't like is the proof that lesser conference champs are often as good as Power 6 bubble teams.
This is even more ridiculous when the P6 teams that end up in the NIT, most times, consciously or not, do not want to be there.
I watched Rutgers play last year. It’s not like they did not put in the effort. But those dudes did not want to be there.
I watched Rutgers play last year. It’s not like they did not put in the effort. But those dudes did not want to be there.
I'll be contrarian and say I am glad to see this. I don't care about small schools and mid-majors. Sure.... every year, there is a cute mid-major story in the NCAAs, but let's not glorify them too much. They may upset a P6 team in the NIT in part because they are waaay more excited to be there than the P6 school. But in the past, the NIT was a decent tournament that saw some good programs play. The team that won the NIT was sometimes a young P6 team that would go on to make noise in subsequent years. If you start getting more P6 teams in the tournament, that may raise the level of play for all of them.
Conference USA won the CBI, had BOTH teams in the NIT finals, and had a team in the NCAA Final Four, yet they only get one team in the NCAAs. If you're going to give more NIT spots to the P6, are you going to give more NCAA spots to the mid-majors?
On the other hand, I don't really want to watch a bunch of games featuring 16-19 (5-15) Ohio State, who would, under this system, have had a top 12 seed and at least one home game.
See, I would much rather watch Ohio State than South Alabama or whatever mid-major. But I'm an elitist snob.
Let's face it...most are NOT watching the NIT at all (at least compared to the NCAAs). Not to pick on you, but you'd rather watch Ohio State than South Alabama, but are you watching either? If South Alabama makes the NIT, all the South Alabama hoops fans are watching. If Ohio State makes it, most of the OSU hoops fans are watching. That's way more. The casual fans of neither team are barely watching at all.
Now, if we're talking the NCAAs, there are arguments to be made on both sides as to who you'd rather see, but there are so many more casual fans watching ANY game that it's not as big a deal. The NIT is probably losing so much money that it's desperate to stay alive because of tradition. It's hard to believe that once upon a time the NIT was a bigger deal than the NCAA tourney.
Yes, but if South Alabama hosts an NIT game, they have a 10,000 person sellout. If OSU hosts an NIT game, they draw maybe 8k fans in a 19,500 seat arena and it sounds like a morgue.
Yeah thats a weird opinion to me.
Do you ever watch middle school basketball?
High school basketball?
Women's college basketball?
Ohio State in the NIT is only appealing to me when they are getting their asses kicked by Saint Bonaventure or some other perpetually screwed mid-major. Rewarding teams that lose most of their games is asinine. And the players know it.
Similar threads
