Jump to content

Source: NCAA presents tournament plans for 72, 76 teams


Recommended Posts

9 hours ago, NT80 said:

"Expansion is largely backed by larger conferences, and smaller leagues do not want to lose the automatic bids that come with a conference tournament championship or face the prospect of always being slotted for the play-in games."

https://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketball/story/_/id/40394682/source-ncaa-presents-tournament-plans-72-76-teams

 

And let me just predict......those extra 4-8 teams will all be from the P6 conferences. And the future tournaments will have even more P6 teams, that didn't even finish .500 in conference play.

  • Upvote 3
  • Pissed 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

49 minutes ago, Andrew said:

Go back to 64 teams…. Then only have the NIT and make it 64. That’s it. Winner of both get auto bids to the big dance next season. Final four in NIT get auto NIT bid. Make teams play in it. 

Great idea!

  • Lovely Take 1
  • Downvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Andrew said:

Go back to 64 teams…. Then only have the NIT and make it 64. That’s it. Winner of both get auto bids to the big dance next season. Final four in NIT get auto NIT bid. Make teams play in it. 

How would getting in for next year make sense? What if your entire team is different and has a terrible season? You get in in from what a team last year did that isn't around anymore? Why play the season if your already qualified? This makes things too messy.

  • Upvote 3
  • Lovely Take 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, SUMG said:

And let me just predict......those extra 4-8 teams will all be from the P6 conferences. And the future tournaments will have even more P6 teams, that didn't even finish .500 in conference play.

There's too much hype for March Madness for the committee to not ultimately add more teams and games, and like you said, most or all of those spots will be given to the shittier P6 teams. But if the lesser tournaments want a full field they'll have to add more G5 teams, but the interest in the NIT, CBI, CIT, etc. will continue to dwindle and be delegated to relegated to FloHoops and CBS Sports Network or at best: ESPN+/streaming only.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Green Otaku said:

How would getting in for next year make sense? What if your entire team is different and has a terrible season? You get in in from what a team last year did that isn't around anymore? Why play the season if your already qualified? This makes things too messy.

Agree.  In this era of NIL and portal there is no continuity or development on college sports teams anymore.  NT mens basketball lost what, 8 players?

This is a football example, but even Alabama is now a different team each season...

The University of Alabama football team lost 30 players to the transfer portal and 10 to the NFL Draft after the 2023–2024 season:

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

53 minutes ago, Matt from A700 said:

There's too much hype for March Madness for the committee to not ultimately add more teams and games, and like you said, most or all of those spots will be given to the shittier P6 teams. But if the lesser tournaments want a full field they'll have to add more G5 teams, but the interest in the NIT, CBI, CIT, etc. will continue to dwindle and be delegated to relegated to FloHoops and CBS Sports Network or at best: ESPN+/streaming only.

The NIT has already said in order to stay financially viable and fight off other tournaments, they will change selection to include more "name" power programs.  Programs that will fill arenas with fans, and get more media views.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, NT80 said:

The NIT has already said in order to stay financially viable and fight off other tournaments, they will change selection to include more "name" power programs.  Programs that will fill arenas with fans, and get more media views.

So we’re never gonna dance again?

200.gif

  • Upvote 1
  • Haha 1
  • Oh Boy! 1
  • Downvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, NT80 said:

The NIT has already said in order to stay financially viable and fight off other tournaments, they will change selection to include more "name" power programs.  Programs that will fill arenas with fans, and get more media views.

If so many P6 programs declined NIT invites when they weren't included in a 68-team NCAA Tournament field, I don't see that changing when they're left out of a 72-80-team field. Plus there's a new Vegas-based postseason tournament that has also said they want to focus on the "best of the rest" in the P6.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

44 minutes ago, Matt from A700 said:

If so many P6 programs declined NIT invites when they weren't included in a 68-team NCAA Tournament field, I don't see that changing when they're left out of a 72-80-team field. Plus there's a new Vegas-based postseason tournament that has also said they want to focus on the "best of the rest" in the P6.

The obvious result of this will end with standard will be dropped for the major programs. .500 overall teams might start getting in. The media will spin it and yak about their "daunting schedule" and so forth and so on. It will all be normalized, just like the 12 team cfb playoff. It's all for them. 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, NorthTexasWeLove said:

The obvious result of this will end with standard will be dropped for the major programs. .500 overall teams might start getting in. The media will spin it and yak about their "daunting schedule" and so forth and so on. It will all be normalized, just like the 12 team cfb playoff. It's all for them. 

NCAA Announced Major Changes to the NIT and the College Hoops World Is Not Happy

NCAA Announced Major Changes to the NIT and the College Hoops World Is Not Happy

In 2024, that will change. The field will now guarantee berths to 12 teams from the ACC, Big Ten, Big 12, Big East, Pac-12 and SEC regardless of record, and will extend no such courtesy to low-major regular-season champions.

https://www.si.com/college/2023/10/27/ncaa-announces-changes-nit-college-hoops-fans-upset

Edited by NT80
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Matt from A700 said:

If so many P6 programs declined NIT invites when they weren't included in a 68-team NCAA Tournament field, I don't see that changing when they're left out of a 72-80-team field. Plus there's a new Vegas-based postseason tournament that has also said they want to focus on the "best of the rest" in the P6.

The recent changes to the postseason NIT were made in direct response to a new postseason tournament expected to begin as early as 2025, leaving the future of the 85-year-old tournament at risk....

 

"The NIT has a new, credible and imminent challenge in the competitive postseason space. Every indication is that a new postseason event is planned to start in 2025," Gavitt said. "The event is well-organized, imagined and funded with a competitive broadcast component and location.

"As a result of all that, we believe we needed to change and evolve the NIT to compete with the best available teams and conferences, given new postseason opportunities that are presented to them. The changes are a preemptive attempt to keep the NIT viable long-term, frankly."

https://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketball/story/_/id/38794849/changes-postseason-nit-made-response-new-tournament

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, NT80 said:

NCAA Announced Major Changes to the NIT and the College Hoops World Is Not Happy

NCAA Announced Major Changes to the NIT and the College Hoops World Is Not Happy

In 2024, that will change. The field will now guarantee berths to 12 teams from the ACC, Big Ten, Big 12, Big East, Pac-12 and SEC regardless of record, and will extend no such courtesy to low-major regular-season champions.

https://www.si.com/college/2023/10/27/ncaa-announces-changes-nit-college-hoops-fans-upset

Of course, majors can be .500 and mid-majors will need to be 28-4 conference tournament losers for an invite. Last year, we were the lone exception. Once the field is expanded to 76 or 80, there will be .500 at-large teams in the NCAA tourney while .900 mid-majors pray for an NIT invitation. 

They are intentionally swing the pendulum further and further away and no one does anything about it. And as I've said before, they (g5 admin/coaches) don't do anything about it because they're cowardly and don't want to blacklist themselves from their next hopeful job. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

send all automatic qualifiers straight to the field of 64

Then let those last 8 schools (bubble schools) fight it out in a play in.  these games would actually be fun to watch, because in theory they should be teams ranked next to each other in the NET. 

 

 

 

 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, untjim1995 said:

Its just so sad to see greed make college athletics all about 50 schools in football, basketball, and baseball. 

I dont necessarily see it like that.  It's true the tournament is a massive money generator, however just about everyone has a shot at getting in with their conference tournament.  And while college basketball has its blue bloods, the talk of the tournament every year are about upsets and Cinderella runs. 

I dont think adding 4 teams to a play-in help benefit high majors over anyone else, its going to benefit those schools that barely miss the cut under the current format. 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, MrAlien said:

I dont necessarily see it like that.  It's true the tournament is a massive money generator, however just about everyone has a shot at getting in with their conference tournament.  And while college basketball has its blue bloods, the talk of the tournament every year are about upsets and Cinderella runs. 

I dont think adding 4 teams to a play-in help benefit high majors over anyone else, its going to benefit those schools that barely miss the cut under the current format. 

Trust me, the teams that will "barely" miss will be conference champions of midmajors that lost in their conference tournaments or the 2nd place teams in non-power league conferences. It'll mean 4 more teams from the Big East, ACC, B1G, SEC, Big 12, and maybe a team from the A-10 or the WCC.

  • Upvote 3
  • Eye Roll 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, MrAlien said:

I dont necessarily see it like that.  It's true the tournament is a massive money generator, however just about everyone has a shot at getting in with their conference tournament.  And while college basketball has its blue bloods, the talk of the tournament every year are about upsets and Cinderella runs. 

I dont think adding 4 teams to a play-in help benefit high majors over anyone else, its going to benefit those schools that barely miss the cut under the current format. 

And then it will go to 80 to benefit those schools that barely miss the cut under this new format. Where does it stop?  Someone is always going to “barely miss the cut.”  Not a fan. Keep it as is. 

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, untjim1995 said:

Trust me, the teams that will "barely" miss will be conference champions of midmajors that lost in their conference tournaments or the 2nd place teams in non-power league conferences. It'll mean 4 more teams from the Big East, ACC, B1G, SEC, Big 12, and maybe a team from the A-10 or the WCC.

Yes, check the percentages of power schools vs non in the Tourney once they add more spots.  The media $ is driving this; they want more "brands".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/24/2024 at 1:02 PM, untjim1995 said:

Trust me, the teams that will "barely" miss will be conference champions of midmajors that lost in their conference tournaments or the 2nd place teams in non-power league conferences. It'll mean 4 more teams from the Big East, ACC, B1G, SEC, Big 12, and maybe a team from the A-10 or the WCC.

Conference champions will automatically qualify for the field of 64, so its not like the WAC's champions will be out.  The additional 4 teams will be those bubble team that currently miss a bid, and they will not go straight to the tournament instead they will go to a play-in.  Using the NET's formula, it is very fair in determining which teams should have a shot. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, MrAlien said:

Conference champions will automatically qualify for the field of 64, so its not like the WAC's champions will be out.  The additional 4 teams will be those bubble team that currently miss a bid, and they will not go straight to the tournament instead they will go to a play-in.  Using the NET's formula, it is very fair in determining which teams should have a shot. 

 

So, are you cool when 7-11 or 8-10 power teams in their conferences get those spots when the third AAC team or the second MVC team gets told they didn’t measure up against what Wake Forest or Georgia or Northwestern did because of their conference’s depth? 
 

because that’s what will happen.

  • Upvote 4
  • Pissed 1
Link to comment
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.
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.



  • Tell a friend

    Love GoMeanGreen.com? Tell a friend!
  • What's going on Mean Green?

    1. 53

      Uniforms

    2. 0

      Channel 8 WFAA Segment

    3. 27

      Pernetti Interview

    4. 0

      Latest on OSU/WSU vs MWC

    5. 34

      Money...Money...MONEY!

  • Popular Contributors

  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      15,401
    • Most Online
      1,865

    Newest Member
    NTWL20
    Joined
×
×
  • 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.