(03-13-2018 12:16 AM)_C2_ Wrote:  400 yet only about 20 have a realistic shot of winning the national title every season. If you wanna be liberal, then only 45-50 can in a given year. Expanding the field wouldn't change that amount, it would just increase the number who could reach the Sweet 16 and Final Four.

Increase the field to 80 and the NIT to 40-48. I don't know why the NIT didn't stick to its 40-team field. As you can see with the CIT and CBI, there's no shortage of teams willing to play in the postseason. And remember, many who declined bids would accept for the non-pay-to-play NIT. Why would an athletic department already bleeding in the red want more debt to play in third rate basketball tournament?

See my Post #21 here

http://csnbbs.com/thread-845330-page-3.html

Only 8 teams outside the six power conferences had a composite ranking in the Top 50. Three of those were conference champs with an auto bid: Cincinnati (5), Gonzaga (10) and Davidson (50).

Four of the other five got at large bids: Wichita St (14), Houston (18), Nevada (27) and Rhode Island (36). Only St Mary's (34) was left out of the NCAAT this year.

On the other hand, two power conference teams above 50 got invited: Syracuse (51) and Providence (56).

Six power conference teams in the Top 50 were left out: Louisville (32), Notre Dame (36), Baylor (37), Penn State 37), USC (37) and Maryland (47).

Looking at those numbers, it's hard for me to see how schools outside the top six conferences can say they were systematically screwed by the selection committee. St Mary's may have a legitimate beef, but not more so than a half dozen P6 schools.