The two tourneys need to be condensed to one tourney...of only 16 teams. Have the Final Four in Biloxi, Charleston, NOLA, Myrtle Beach. The arena only needs to be about 5k. It should emphasize on Midmajors and low majors.

San Francisco is playing Rice in the CBI according to twitter.

The nit should just expand to 64 and eliminate these things

(03-12-2017 09:25 PM)bluesox Wrote:  The nit should just expand to 64 and eliminate these things

That would be another solution...a chance to invite more small teams.

What an embarrassment it'd be for the the NIT to do that and not have enough teams.

(03-12-2017 09:58 PM)_C2_ Wrote:  What an embarrassment it'd be for the the NIT to do that and not have enough teams.

That wouldn't happen...the NIT is owned by the NCAA now. Teams would go...you might have an occasional team say no (like LSU last year) but expenses are covered and many of the games are on ESPN/2/U

Four 16 team pods by region. Makes too much sense. Then you could have a 8 or 16 team tourney for others that can't get into the NIT but still want to play.

Meh, unless the NIT was a second chance tournament as I and others have proposed, why would anyone care so much about how many teams are in the NIT?

I think the women's NIT has a great concept. The highest rated team from each conference not selected to the NCAA receives an auto bid.

That said, I still think smaller 4 and 8 team events in destination cities is a better path for the CIT/CBI type events.

the circuse locked nit into tues-thrus,
now that the wk is freed up
nit can move to wkend & expand to 64 with mgs freed up
barnum & bailly closed shop

Surprised I haven't seen UT-Martin in any tournament. Did I miss it?

64 team NIT could do first two rounds on campus with "regional" in Las Vegas of 16 teams and final four still at MSG. Chance to Go to Vegas and NYC would make for a fun trip for teams

(03-13-2017 01:18 PM)SMUfan Wrote:  Surprised I haven't seen UT-Martin in any tournament. Did I miss it?

The Wikipedia machine says they host UNC Asheville, 8pm 16 March in the first round.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2017_Colle...Tournament

(03-12-2017 09:25 PM)bluesox Wrote:  The nit should just expand to 64 and eliminate these things

The CBI is 16, the CIT is 26, and the Las Vegas 16 is on hiatus this year ... the NIT could comfortably expand to 48, invite the top regular season schools from each division not in the NCAA tournament, have 32 at large spots, seed the top 16 into the second round, and from the shape of things this year, there'd only be room for one pay to play conference left ... or maybe two 8-team regional single-site tournaments.

(An eight team single-site tournament could even be double-elimination, to give young teams looking ahead to the next season two games guaranteed, 3:1 shot at 3.)

Full CIT Field here:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2017_Colle...Tournament

Perhaps groups of conferences should have their own third-tier postseasons. For example, the Summit and Horizon Invitational Tournament.

That's awful, what a horrid bracket.

Does anyone know how many teams declined bids?

GW decided to play. We have a young team and we were playing better at year end. Some more practice time for the team.

(03-14-2017 04:44 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  GW decided to play. We have a young team and we were playing better at year end. Some more practice time for the team.

Same for UIC, which is in the CBI.

(03-14-2017 03:51 PM)_C2_ Wrote:  Does anyone know how many teams declined bids?

When CMU in the MAC lost their tournament game, they announced they wouldn't be going to a third tier tournament ... I have no idea whether they had a bid or not, but since the CIT came up 6 short on their target 32 team format, it seems like they would have got one if they wanted to pay to host.

(03-14-2017 07:43 PM)Chuck_A Wrote:  

(03-14-2017 04:44 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  GW decided to play. We have a young team and we were playing better at year end. Some more practice time for the team.

Same for UIC, which is in the CBI.

That's normally the calculation ... if you have a senior-heavy team, there's less appeal in accepting a bid from a third tier tournament. And if the wheels fell off at the end of the season, it normally makes sense to stick a fork in it and say it's done.

OTOH, since the host has a better chance of getting multiple games, but the host often loses money on the ticket guarantee, some younger teams may have the coach wanting to go if they can host and the AD telling them there is not enough money in the budget to cover the hosting costs.