Jump to content

NIT Changes Favor Power 6

MCMLXXX

By MCMLXXX
in Mean Green Basketball

 Share

Recommended Posts

CMJ Grand Master

CMJ

Posted
Posted

That's awful.  When they changed the rule 12-15 years ago mandating every regular season champion was assured of a bid in the NIT, that was a tremendous improvement from back in the day when it was more of a free for all.  Hell, even the ESPN talking heads thought it was great.

  • Upvote 3
Pavlovs Eagle Veteran

Pavlovs Eagle

Posted
Posted
12 hours ago, CMP said:

It isn't a competition for the best basketball teams, it is a competition for the best brand$. God forbid we have a repeat of last year...

Honestly the most shameful thing the NIT did to their brand and themselves was playing in a 3rd tier off-strip Las Vegas casino's 7k seat arena.  The audience and enthusiasm fell with the stage the NIT created for themselves by not playing in MSG.

  • Upvote 6
  • Downvote 1
NT80 Grand Master

NT80

Posted
Posted
13 hours ago, CMP said:

It isn't a competition for the best basketball teams, it is a competition for the best brand$. God forbid we have a repeat of last year...

We defeated a Big12 and Big10 "brand" on our way to the trophy!

  • Upvote 2
greenminer Grand Master

greenminer

Posted
Posted
14 hours ago, CMJ said:

That's awful.  When they changed the rule 12-15 years ago mandating every regular season champion was assured of a bid in the NIT, that was a tremendous improvement from back in the day when it was more of a free for all.  Hell, even the ESPN talking heads thought it was great.

I'm trying to wrap my mind around the reasoning.  I thought everybody was on board with the conference champ-autobid thing.

Some serious money must be involved behind this.

  • Upvote 2
CMJ Grand Master

CMJ

Posted
Posted
18 minutes ago, greenminer said:

I'm trying to wrap my mind around the reasoning.  I thought everybody was on board with the conference champ-autobid thing.

Some serious money must be involved behind this.

Must have been the semis that included 3 "off brand" schools this year.

  • Upvote 4
  • Pissed 1
Salsa_Verde Veteran

Salsa_Verde

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, NT80 said:

We defeated a Big12 and Big10 "brand" on our way to the trophy!

Probably why they’re changing the rules 🫠

  • Upvote 1
  • Pissed 1
Salsa_Verde Veteran

Salsa_Verde

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, CMJ said:

Must have been the semis that included 3 "off brand" schools this year.

FAU and SDSU final four game viewership was really poor from what I’ve read. 

CMJ Grand Master

CMJ

Posted
Posted
12 minutes ago, Salsa_Verde said:

FAU and SDSU final four game viewership was really poor from what I’ve read. 

I meant the NIT semis, but yeah the NCAAs as well.

Censored by Laurie Grand Master

Censored by Laurie

Posted
Posted
3 hours ago, CMJ said:

I meant the NIT semis, but yeah the NCAAs as well.

Does anyone know how to look up the TV numbers for a final? Wondering if UNT/UAB did substantially lower numbers than the previous two finals…Xavier/A&M and Memphis/Miss. State.

  • Upvote 2
Green Otaku Grand Master

Green Otaku

Posted
Posted
23 hours ago, greenminer said:

I'm trying to wrap my mind around the reasoning.  I thought everybody was on board with the conference champ-autobid thing.

Some serious money must be involved behind this.

IIRC they proposed a post-season tournament that would air on Fox that had the best left out teams of the Big12, B1G, and Big East. Ultimately it fell through, but I think this scared the NIT, as such a move would remove any type of importance it has. They are seeing that profitability and eyeballs are more important than competition. 

  • Pissed 1
CMJ Grand Master

CMJ

Posted
Posted
On 10/28/2023 at 8:13 AM, Pavlovs Eagle said:

Honestly the most shameful thing the NIT did to their brand and themselves was playing in a 3rd tier off-strip Las Vegas casino's 7k seat arena.  The audience and enthusiasm fell with the stage the NIT created for themselves by not playing in MSG.

It wasn't the NIT's decision to leave MSG.  

NT80 Grand Master

NT80

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, CMJ said:

It wasn't the NIT's decision to leave MSG.  

This is from a March 2022 article.  It implies the NIT was accepting bids from other location$...

Nothing has decided beyond 2024, but ESPN reported that the NIT is "accepting bids from numerous venues" to host the next NITs.

https://www.cbssports.com/college-basketball/news/nit-will-reportedly-leave-madison-square-garden-until-at-least-2025/

CMJ Grand Master

CMJ

Posted
Posted
47 minutes ago, NT80 said:

This is from a March 2022 article.  It implies the NIT was accepting bids from other location$...

Nothing has decided beyond 2024, but ESPN reported that the NIT is "accepting bids from numerous venues" to host the next NITs.

https://www.cbssports.com/college-basketball/news/nit-will-reportedly-leave-madison-square-garden-until-at-least-2025/

Yeah, but that was after MSG had apparently wanted out.  The word was that they wanted to be able to host Regional Semis and Finals on a more regular basis (MSG actually very rarely hosted Regionals) and scheduling around having the NCAAs and the NIT made it very tough to also find time for both the Rangers and Knicks to have to be away for multiple weeks.

MrAlien Mentor

MrAlien

Posted
Posted

How much would this really change the field?  There was always going to be a handful of P6 schools that get invites, and those mid-major bubble schools that dont get an at large bid to the NCAAT will still likely receive invitations.  

CMJ Grand Master

CMJ

Posted
Posted
On 10/30/2023 at 8:11 AM, MrAlien said:

How much would this really change the field?  There was always going to be a handful of P6 schools that get invites, and those mid-major bubble schools that dont get an at large bid to the NCAAT will still likely receive invitations.  

There were always at least a handful of schools that won their league regular season title, but didn't win the postseason tourney.  They deserve to play in the NIT and they won't now.

  • Upvote 1
  • Pissed 1
MrAlien Mentor

MrAlien

Posted
Posted
35 minutes ago, CMJ said:

There were always at least a handful of schools that won their league regular season title, but didn't win the postseason tourney.  They deserve to play in the NIT and they won't now.

The rule isn't restricting them from the tournament, just from an auto bid.  This may also effect NCAAT selections, perhaps the committee will not feel compelled to select some of those 7th and 8th place P6 schools, if their are already guaranteed a post season in the NIT. 

CMJ Grand Master

CMJ

Posted
Posted (edited)
40 minutes ago, MrAlien said:

The rule isn't restricting them from the tournament, just from an auto bid.  This may also effect NCAAT selections, perhaps the committee will not feel compelled to select some of those 7th and 8th place P6 schools, if their are already guaranteed a post season in the NIT. 

Let me assure you that the winner of the SWAC regular season isn't getting in the NIT if they don't win their league tournament.  The ONLY way they're getting in the NIT is with the auto bid.  That's true for about 20 leagues.

Edited by CMJ
  • Upvote 1
GMG_Dallas Grand Master

GMG_Dallas

Posted
Posted
38 minutes ago, MrAlien said:

The rule isn't restricting them from the tournament, just from an auto bid.  This may also effect NCAAT selections, perhaps the committee will not feel compelled to select some of those 7th and 8th place P6 schools, if their are already guaranteed a post season in the NIT. 

It's not just about the auto bid to get into the tournament. Those 12 auto bid "P6" programs will be the higher seeds and host their first round NIT games. I never got to go to an NIT game but how many UNT fans made lifelong memories by getting to watch UNT host some NIT games the past two seasons? If the new rules had been implemented 2 years ago, Virginia likely would have never come to the Super Pit. These are huge opportunities for programs and dedicated fans to experience hosting highmajor programs that don't happen often for us. It's complete bull sh*t.

  • Upvote 3
MrAlien Mentor

MrAlien

Posted
Posted

If it keeps 7th and 8th place P6 teams out of the NCAAT, then it will open up more bids for mid major conferences.  If thats how the committee looks at it then I am OK with it.  

The "first 4 out" will be given "deference" according to the rule, would assume that means a top seed and a home game.  Some in that group are P6 schools, they would have been there anyway in the old rules.  You could make the same argument for the "next 4 out" whom typically get the 2 seed (also a home game). 

So I dont think it will change a whole lot, there still going to be someone that is left out, what happens to that 13th P6 school?  will they stick to the NET rankings? 

CMJ Grand Master

CMJ

Posted
Posted
5 hours ago, MrAlien said:

If it keeps 7th and 8th place P6 teams out of the NCAAT, then it will open up more bids for mid major conferences.  If thats how the committee looks at it then I am OK with it.  

The "first 4 out" will be given "deference" according to the rule, would assume that means a top seed and a home game.  Some in that group are P6 schools, they would have been there anyway in the old rules.  You could make the same argument for the "next 4 out" whom typically get the 2 seed (also a home game). 

So I dont think it will change a whole lot, there still going to be someone that is left out, what happens to that 13th P6 school?  will they stick to the NET rankings? 

It's not keeping the 7th and 8th place Big XII school out of the Big Dance.

MrAlien Mentor

MrAlien

Posted
Posted
4 hours ago, CMJ said:

It's not keeping the 7th and 8th place Big XII school out of the Big Dance.

Guess we will have to wait and see how that plays out, and how strictly they follow to the NET.

 

greenminer Grand Master

greenminer

Posted
Posted (edited)
10 minutes ago, MrAlien said:

and how strictly they follow to the NET.

They have never strictly followed the NET.  IIRC, when they waiver from it, 99% of the time it Is to satisfy a major brand and screw a smaller school out of a bid.

Also, I always suggest not using P5/P6 nomenclature in bball.  That is lingo that originated in BCS contracts and, thus, football only.  Lazy media mouths have hypnotized the casual fan into using it across all of college sports.   To my knowledge, it originally was never intended for bball.

It doesn't drive me crazy when people use it for MBB, it just makes one look less knowledgeable.

Edited by greenminer
  • Upvote 2

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

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.

×
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Tell a friend

    Love GoMeanGreen.com? Tell a friend!

  • What's going on Mean Green?

    1. 14

      Auburn warns of potential ticket price hike ahead of revenue-sharing model

      There are probably 10 levels of donors and fans for a college athletic program. Anyone from a 70-year-alum always a supporter, to businessman only for advertising, to mom & dad only while son is going there, to corporate CEO wanting a name on a building, to t-shirt fans who just like the Flying Worm, etc. At P4 schools when the AD says they need cash, usually someone Big or a lot of smaller someones steps up. At our level I think it's more difficult to predict the donors and level of donations. I think it's also more difficult to find donors willing to give blindly to a non-specific NIL fund than to a specific building fund.
      NT80 in Mean Green Football
    2. 32

      Houston Christian (12/22/24)

      Disappointed the game didn't allow us to see Mason, Cotton, and Vice.
      • 2
      • Upvote
      • RV
      Matt from A700 in Mean Green Basketball
    3. 29

      24/25 MBB Attendance Tracker

      Two more home games before students are back, then hopefully the athletic department is going all out to try to compete with last year's record-breaking numbers.
      • 1
      • Upvote
      Matt from A700 in Mean Green Basketball
    4. 14

      Auburn warns of potential ticket price hike ahead of revenue-sharing model

      In traditional professional football, when teams pay players and have a losing season, the teams still make $$$ and turn a profit. Thus they can afford to continue to pay players. In today’s college football, when boosters pay players NIL and the team has a losing season, the boosters lose money AND they don’t get to experience the joy of being associated with a winner. Will those boosters keep donating NIL? Do you have to find new boosters? Don’t you eventually run out of boosters? Just don’t see how this NIL model is sustainable. Rich people didn’t get rich by losing money and I don’t see how you can keep asking them to do that via NIL. The revenue sharing model WILL work and it will be interesting to see what percentage of revenue is ultimately allocated to labor. The NBA gives 51% of gross revenue to players. The other major professional leagues give less. But why would colleges give players anything close to that? College players are infinitely replaceable. People root for their school and as a consequence of that, root for the players competing for that school. But if the Top 100 players in college football disappeared overnight, would the popularity of the sport suffer at all? I don’t think it would. Offer the players minimum wage, make them sign binding contracts with buyouts and non-competes (assuming you can still enforce those: that is another rabbit hole). NIL will still exist but won’t be as big of a deal because of the contracts and buyouts. If a players thinks he is too good for this system, they can start their own football league or wait until they are eligible for the NFL. Why wouldn’t this work?
      • 2
      • Upvote
      MeanGreenZen in Mean Green Football
    5. 14

      Auburn warns of potential ticket price hike ahead of revenue-sharing model

      I don’t know how much they care. It’s like monopoly money. Many of them are just borrowing from Uncle Sam and hoping they don’t have to pay it back.
      • 1
      • Pissed
      Aquila_Viridis in Mean Green Football

  • Popular Contributors

  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      15,505
    • Most Online
      1,865
    Jepper
    Newest Member
    Jepper
    Joined

  • Most Points

    1. 1
      El Paso Eagle
      El Paso Eagle
      170,029
    2. 2
      NT80
      NT80
      136,863
    3. 3
      KingDL1
      KingDL1
      130,955
    4. 4
      greenminer
      greenminer
      123,780
    5. 5
      TheReal_jayD
      TheReal_jayD
      108,904

  • Biggest Gamblers

    1. 1
      EdtheEagle
      EdtheEagle
      26,591,107
    2. 2
      UNTLifer
      UNTLifer
      4,480,984
    3. 3
      untphd
      untphd
      841,161
    4. 4
      flyonthewall
      flyonthewall
      670,422
    5. 5
      3_n_out
      3_n_out
      578,480
    6. 6
      SteaminWillieBeamin
    7. 7
      cousin oliver
      cousin oliver
      448,120
    8. 8
      UNT_FH_FR_YR
      UNT_FH_FR_YR
      389,039
    9. 9
      meangreenfaninno
    10. 10
      South Texas Green

WE BELIEVE IN THE MEAN GREEN!

News

Recruiting

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. Please review our full Privacy Policy before using our site.