(03-29-2016 12:09 PM)HuskyU Wrote:  

(03-29-2016 11:06 AM)Soobahk40050 Wrote:  Delay the NCAA by a week and have the NIT at 32 teams whittle down to the first four in Dayton

This is what I always thought. It kills any future complaints about teams being left out and gives all the regular season champions (who got upset in their conference tourneys) a chance at the big dance.

The NIT Final Four become the First Four.

winner, winner, chicken dinner!

(03-29-2016 12:09 PM)HuskyU Wrote:  

(03-29-2016 11:06 AM)Soobahk40050 Wrote:  Delay the NCAA by a week and have the NIT at 32 teams whittle down to the first four in Dayton

This is what I always thought. It kills any future complaints about teams being left out and gives all the regular season champions (who got upset in their conference tourneys) a chance at the big dance.

The NIT Final Four become the First Four.

Even though my team is still alive in the NIT, I'm opposed to this. Here's why.

My guess is that all the non-P5s will be shunted off to the NIT and the P5 teams will just get quadruple byes from here on out.

The A-10 would get, maybe, two teams in the round of 64 in that scenario. The MVC would get one.

The A-10, the WCC, the MVC, etc. would probably lose more than they'd win in this scenario.

(03-29-2016 02:04 PM)goofus Wrote:  Sometimes I wonder if the NIT should become the loser's bracket from NCAA games starting with the losers in round of 64.

So the 32 losers from the NCAA would play each other in first round of NIT.

Then in the 2ND round if NIT, the 16 losers from next round of NCAA would play the 16 winners from first round of NIT. Then those 16 winners would play each other in the 3rd round of NIT

Then in round 4 of NIT, the 8 losers from the sweet 16 round of NCAA would play the 8 winners from the 3rd round of the NIT. Then those 8 winners would play in the 5th round of the NIT.

Then in the 6th round of NIT, the 4 losers of the elite 8 in the NCAA would play the 4 winners from the 5th round of NIT. Then those 4 winners would play each other in 7th round of NIT.

Then in the 8th round of the NIT, the 2 losers from the NCAA final 4 would play the 2 winners from NIT 7th round. Then those 2 winners would play each other in 9th round of NIT.

Then in the 10th and final round of NIT, the loser of NCAA NCG would play the winner of NIT round #9. Winner is NIT champion.

Now that's a tournament you could be proud to win.

THIS. The NCAA tournament needs consolation games. It would be a winner to combine the NCAA losers' bracket with the NIT somehow.

IMO, flow the Field of 64, Round of 32, and Sweet 16 losers into a consolation bracket that eventually combines with the NIT - where the NIT Final Four are merged with the last four teams from the NCAA consolation bracket (pre-NCAA Elite 8). To accomplish this, many of the consolation bracket games can be played at the NCAA tournament venues; then add a quarterfinal round at MSG.

Separate the NCAA Elite 8 and NCAA Final Four into separate consolation brackets, where you end up with a 3rd place game (for Final Four losers) and 5th and 7th place games (for the Elite 8 losers).

NIT winner is essentially 9th place game, but merges the NCAA consolation bracket with the best of the rest.

(03-29-2016 09:33 AM)kreed5120 Wrote:  I feel your 10-20 records are huge exaggerations.

Here are the records of the winning team the season after winning.
2015 - 15-15
2014 - 18-15
2013 - 26-12
2012 - 19-15
2011 - 27-6
2010 - 22-14

I'm not saying you have to like the idea, but no team is graduating 13 players so there will definitely be players remaining.

Edit: I'm not even saying it should be instituted. I'm just curious about others thoughts.

Its a nice idea in theory, but I don't think it works practically. In those 6 years, 2 of them the team would have qualified without it. I haven't looked up who and if they did, but with 26 and 27 wins they clearly made the tournament. The 22-14 team probably made it too. The 15-15 team clearly didn't make the tournament and shouldn't have.

(03-29-2016 09:19 AM)stever20 Wrote:  no. it's a dumb as hell idea. everyone graduates and the team coming back goes 10-20. Why should they get a spot in the Big Dance?

What stever20 said.

But, if the team is Syracuse, I'd make an exception. They'd find themselves 10-20 the next season and still make a F4 run.

(03-29-2016 09:57 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  Dumb idea. First, nothing done this year should ever guarantee anything for next year. Different teams.

Second, why should the NIT champ this year get an auto-bid but not any teams that accomplished things in this year's NCAA tournament? In effect, you are saying winning the NIT is better than making the NCAA sweet 16, heck better than making the Final 4 or even winning the national title, as those teams would not get the same guarantee.

Silly.

If anything, winning the NIT should grant you access to the NCAA's the same year, not the following year and even that is problematic and unfair. Maybe you could have the NIT quickly play all of their games and have the Final Four square off at MSG for the right to go to the NCAA Tournament like the First Four in Dayton. That would be only way this idea of yours could actually make sense and gain traction.

(03-29-2016 12:09 PM)HuskyU Wrote:  

(03-29-2016 11:06 AM)Soobahk40050 Wrote:  Delay the NCAA by a week and have the NIT at 32 teams whittle down to the first four in Dayton

This is what I always thought. It kills any future complaints about teams being left out and gives all the regular season champions (who got upset in their conference tourneys) a chance at the big dance.

The NIT Final Four become the First Four.

Beat me to it. The only way any variation of this idea works.

(03-30-2016 11:04 AM)YNot Wrote:  THIS. The NCAA tournament needs consolation games. It would be a winner to combine the NCAA losers' bracket with the NIT somehow.

IMO, flow the Field of 64, Round of 32, and Sweet 16 losers into a consolation bracket that eventually combines with the NIT - where the NIT Final Four are merged with the last four teams from the NCAA consolation bracket (pre-NCAA Elite 8). To accomplish this, many of the consolation bracket games can be played at the NCAA tournament venues; then add a quarterfinal round at MSG.

Separate the NCAA Elite 8 and NCAA Final Four into separate consolation brackets, where you end up with a 3rd place game (for Final Four losers) and 5th and 7th place games (for the Elite 8 losers).

NIT winner is essentially 9th place game, but merges the NCAA consolation bracket with the best of the rest.

The NCAAT has already had consolation games, they were done away with because nobody cared enough (at least to fill a dome for one, as it was dropped as of the 1982 Final Four) and they were a waste of time, especially for the student-athletes. This whittled down to the NIT, which dropped it's 3rd place game a decade or so ago.

(04-01-2016 12:50 PM)_C2_ Wrote:  

(03-30-2016 11:04 AM)YNot Wrote:  THIS. The NCAA tournament needs consolation games. It would be a winner to combine the NCAA losers' bracket with the NIT somehow.

IMO, flow the Field of 64, Round of 32, and Sweet 16 losers into a consolation bracket that eventually combines with the NIT - where the NIT Final Four are merged with the last four teams from the NCAA consolation bracket (pre-NCAA Elite 8). To accomplish this, many of the consolation bracket games can be played at the NCAA tournament venues; then add a quarterfinal round at MSG.

Separate the NCAA Elite 8 and NCAA Final Four into separate consolation brackets, where you end up with a 3rd place game (for Final Four losers) and 5th and 7th place games (for the Elite 8 losers).

NIT winner is essentially 9th place game, but merges the NCAA consolation bracket with the best of the rest.

The NCAAT has already had consolation games, they were done away with because nobody cared enough (at least to fill a dome for one, as it was dropped as of the 1982 Final Four) and they were a waste of time, especially for the student-athletes. This whittled down to the NIT, which dropped it's 3rd place game a decade or so ago.

Besides, it sucks for the team that makes the final four then loses two games in a row.

(03-29-2016 12:09 PM)HuskyU Wrote:  

(03-29-2016 11:06 AM)Soobahk40050 Wrote:  Delay the NCAA by a week and have the NIT at 32 teams whittle down to the first four in Dayton

This is what I always thought. It kills any future complaints about teams being left out and gives all the regular season champions (who got upset in their conference tourneys) a chance at the big dance.

The NIT Final Four become the First Four.

THAT is a much better idea

Sent from my SM-G920P using Tapatalk

what if there were so many fish there was no room for water in the sea.

(03-29-2016 02:04 PM)goofus Wrote:  Sometimes I wonder if the NIT should become the loser's bracket from NCAA games starting with the losers in round of 64.

So the 32 losers from the NCAA would play each other in first round of NIT.

Then in the 2ND round if NIT, the 16 losers from next round of NCAA would play the 16 winners from first round of NIT. Then those 16 winners would play each other in the 3rd round of NIT

Then in round 4 of NIT, the 8 losers from the sweet 16 round of NCAA would play the 8 winners from the 3rd round of the NIT. Then those 8 winners would play in the 5th round of the NIT.

Then in the 6th round of NIT, the 4 losers of the elite 8 in the NCAA would play the 4 winners from the 5th round of NIT. Then those 4 winners would play each other in 7th round of NIT.

Then in the 8th round of the NIT, the 2 losers from the NCAA final 4 would play the 2 winners from NIT 7th round. Then those 2 winners would play each other in 9th round of NIT.

Then in the 10th and final round of NIT, the loser of NCAA NCG would play the winner of NIT round #9. Winner is NIT champion.

Now that's a tournament you could be proud to win.

Another alternative is to give the P6 (Football P5 + Big East) 48 spots in the round of 64. Each of the 48 would have a double bye, and those six conferences would hold their conference tourneys during their bye week.

The 26 remaining conferences would get 64 spots in the opening round, and would play down to 16 teams who advance to the round of 64. Those 16 survivors, plus the P6 48, would be seeded after the play in week.

From the 48 teams who failed to make it to the round of 64, plus any eligible P6 teams not selected for the NCAA, select the 32 best to create the NIT field.

When you get to the NCAA round of 64, barring major upsets, you would expect the #16 seeds to have an RPI near 70, instead of the current model which pits teams with an RPI of 200+ against the #1 seeds.

After the 96 teams (64 in NCAA and 32 in NIT) are set, who cares what the other 254 do?

(04-02-2016 01:43 PM)ken d Wrote:  

(03-29-2016 02:04 PM)goofus Wrote:  Sometimes I wonder if the NIT should become the loser's bracket from NCAA games starting with the losers in round of 64.

So the 32 losers from the NCAA would play each other in first round of NIT.

Then in the 2ND round if NIT, the 16 losers from next round of NCAA would play the 16 winners from first round of NIT. Then those 16 winners would play each other in the 3rd round of NIT

Then in round 4 of NIT, the 8 losers from the sweet 16 round of NCAA would play the 8 winners from the 3rd round of the NIT. Then those 8 winners would play in the 5th round of the NIT.

Then in the 6th round of NIT, the 4 losers of the elite 8 in the NCAA would play the 4 winners from the 5th round of NIT. Then those 4 winners would play each other in 7th round of NIT.

Then in the 8th round of the NIT, the 2 losers from the NCAA final 4 would play the 2 winners from NIT 7th round. Then those 2 winners would play each other in 9th round of NIT.

Then in the 10th and final round of NIT, the loser of NCAA NCG would play the winner of NIT round #9. Winner is NIT champion.

Now that's a tournament you could be proud to win.

Another alternative is to give the P6 (Football P5 + Big East) 48 spots in the round of 64. Each of the 48 would have a double bye, and those six conferences would hold their conference tourneys during their bye week.

The 26 remaining conferences would get 64 spots in the opening round, and would play down to 16 teams who advance to the round of 64. Those 16 survivors, plus the P6 48, would be seeded after the play in week.

From the 48 teams who failed to make it to the round of 64, plus any P6 teams not selected for the NCAA, select the 32 best to create the NIT field.

When you get to the round of 64, barring major upsets, you would expect the #16 seeds to have an RPI near 70, instead of the current model which pits teams with an RPI of 200+ against the #1 seeds.

After the 96 teams (64 in NCAA and 32 in NIT) are set, who cares what the other 254 do?

or just leave it as is. For gosh sakes- it's not broke. Why the hell do we need MORE P5 teams in the tourney? Just stop...

(04-02-2016 01:46 PM)stever20 Wrote:  

(04-02-2016 01:43 PM)ken d Wrote:  

(03-29-2016 02:04 PM)goofus Wrote:  Sometimes I wonder if the NIT should become the loser's bracket from NCAA games starting with the losers in round of 64.

So the 32 losers from the NCAA would play each other in first round of NIT.

Then in the 2ND round if NIT, the 16 losers from next round of NCAA would play the 16 winners from first round of NIT. Then those 16 winners would play each other in the 3rd round of NIT

Then in round 4 of NIT, the 8 losers from the sweet 16 round of NCAA would play the 8 winners from the 3rd round of the NIT. Then those 8 winners would play in the 5th round of the NIT.

Then in the 6th round of NIT, the 4 losers of the elite 8 in the NCAA would play the 4 winners from the 5th round of NIT. Then those 4 winners would play each other in 7th round of NIT.

Then in the 8th round of the NIT, the 2 losers from the NCAA final 4 would play the 2 winners from NIT 7th round. Then those 2 winners would play each other in 9th round of NIT.

Then in the 10th and final round of NIT, the loser of NCAA NCG would play the winner of NIT round #9. Winner is NIT champion.

Now that's a tournament you could be proud to win.

Another alternative is to give the P6 (Football P5 + Big East) 48 spots in the round of 64. Each of the 48 would have a double bye, and those six conferences would hold their conference tourneys during their bye week.

The 26 remaining conferences would get 64 spots in the opening round, and would play down to 16 teams who advance to the round of 64. Those 16 survivors, plus the P6 48, would be seeded after the play in week.

From the 48 teams who failed to make it to the round of 64, plus any P6 teams not selected for the NCAA, select the 32 best to create the NIT field.

When you get to the round of 64, barring major upsets, you would expect the #16 seeds to have an RPI near 70, instead of the current model which pits teams with an RPI of 200+ against the #1 seeds.

After the 96 teams (64 in NCAA and 32 in NIT) are set, who cares what the other 254 do?

or just leave it as is. For gosh sakes- it's not broke. Why the hell do we need MORE P5 teams in the tourney? Just stop...

I'd bet that the fans of the 32 additional non-P5 schools that would get invited to the Big Dance would appreciate it.

except for the fact that 26 non p6 schools already go. and it makes it where teams that do go have to play 2 games to get in the bracket of 64. So Gonzaga has to play 2 games to get in, while Alabama gets to go into the round of 64 automatically. NO. HELL NO.

just to show how pathetic the idea is....
This year the P5+BE got 36 spots in the NCAA tourney.
They also got 10 spots in the NIT tourney.

So 2 P6 teams who didn't even qualify for the NIT wouldn't just get in the NCAA tourney, but automatically be in the round of 64. That idea is ******* more stupid than the NIT winner idea that started this thread.

(04-02-2016 02:10 PM)stever20 Wrote:  except for the fact that 26 non p6 schools already go. and it makes it where teams that do go have to play 2 games to get in the bracket of 64. So Gonzaga has to play 2 games to get in, while Alabama gets to go into the round of 64 automatically. NO. HELL NO.

I think you're looking at it as if those teams have to play two games, and I'm looking at it as if they get to play two games.

What's more, I'm looking at it as many of those teams get a reasonable shot at winning NCAAT games, without having to give up a shot at playing in, and potentially winning, NIT games in the bargain. I would go so far as to guarantee all 16 of the second round losers in the NCAAT a spot in the NIT.

If letting a few more P6 teams in to become the cannon fodder for the top seeds in the NCAAT is the price to pay for that, I could live with it.

There is no ******* reason why 2 teams that didn't even make the dumb ass NIT this year not only would get in, but automatically get in the round of 64, while teams like VCU, UConn, Cincy, etc. have to win 2 games to just get there. **** that and **** the p5.

If you want the 1 seeds to have to face tougher teams, expand the tourney up to 96 teams naturally, not ******* rigged to the P5 like you say.

You sound angry. You also sound pissed off at the P5. But then you suggest an alternative that would give those conferences about the same number of additional bids as my suggestion does, at the expense of, for want of a better term, the G26 conferences, who would get significantly fewer.

My suggestion was in the context of the suggestion in the OP. I'm not suggesting the NCAAT is broken. But what's the need for all the "**** this" and "**** that"?

yeah you would give the G26 same number of bids, but make them earn their way to the round of 64, while the P6 gets to cherry pick there way in. No thank you. It's the we'll give you these spots, while ******* stabbing you in the back..... Why should Alabama be in the round of 64, while UConn or VCU would have to win 2 games to get in there? That's moronic.