NIT Changes

Imagine that NIT changes that favor the big boys....

https://theathletic.com/5005900/2023...-format-rules/

"The National Invitation Tournament is changing its selection process in 2024 and will no longer award automatic bids to the conference regular-season champions that don’t win their conference tournament or aren’t among the 68 teams selected to play in the men’s NCAA Tournament, the NIT Board of Managers announced Friday.

Moving forward, “the NIT will guarantee two teams (based on the NET rankings) from each of six conferences (Atlantic Coast, Big East, Big Ten, Big 12, Pac-12 and Southeastern). The top two teams in the NET rankings not qualifying for the NCAA men’s basketball tournament from each conference, regardless of won-loss record, will be selected,” per the announcement.

Those 12 teams will be guaranteed the opportunity to host a first-round game in the NIT.
To round out the field of 32, the NIT will “select the 20 best teams available” and choose four teams from that pool to be first-round hosts with priority given to the “first four teams out” of the NCAA tournament.

"

Blatant

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Turbine

Blatant

---

Right after North Texas and UAB played in championship

Saying that is ridiculous is an understatement. Why do Power Conference teams get to host just for the sake of being a Power Conference team?! College Sports aren't about how good your conference is or how big your school is, whoever's the best deserves a chance in the postseason. It doesn't matter who it is! Even CBS Sports said that "The move puts the squeeze on low and mid-major programs who win their conference's regular season title but fail to win their conference tournament and thus miss out on an automatic NCAA Tournament bid." Terrible decision by the NCAA.

Well, well. Now that we have a H/H with the MAC, it just further solidifies the "know your place" the non power conferences are being shown.

Probably a precursor to a 96 team field, NIT dies as a result. Obviously today's move is set to create outrage.

Waters down the regular season even more.

"3 Games in March" is literally all that matters now.

But at the same time many on here may be happy that it now gives g5 coaches a lower pct of postseason seasons

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RougaWhite&Blue

But at the same time many on here may be happy that it now gives g5 coaches a lower pct of postseason seasons

---

Interesting too considering sounds like another NCAA tournament expansion is on the horizon.

Nothing a power 5 AD wants more than to have his/her cellar-dwelling basketball program in a tournament.

The NIT is essentially going to become a head coaching practice test for an assistant b/c the HC will have already been fired.

Mid-majors are what keeps the NCAA Tournament alive and thriving. And yet the NIT wants them gone. Makes total sense.

mid majors yes, but not necessarily g5s…. they like small schools without a football threat. gonzaga, whichita, loyola chicago, butler, marquette, etc, etc… louisiana probably not so much.

i cant read the article but let me make a SWAG, scientific wild ass guess. its simple, money. the ncaa tournament makes its money from tv revenue. the NIT makes its money from ticket sales, butts in seats if you will. look at attendance, lets use louisiana and mississippi state as examples. ul has about a 2500-3500 attendance record on average for many years while mississippi state who is a middle of the road sec program at best, averages about 7000 per game. more tickets sales means a bigger profit for the NIT. when schools that have a smaller avg. attendance host and advance in the tournament, the NIT will make less money. the NIT now wants to make its money in the first 2 rounds so that if schools that have a lower attendance and that dont travel well advance, they made their money in the early part of the tourney. i dont see it as a hard slap in the face of the g5 as some might. you have to understand that the NIT has been on shaky ground and has almost folded several times in the past 40 plus years because of low ticket sales from hosting schools. its my understanding that the ncaa took over the tournament. the NIT back in the day was a private enterprise and they werent making much money with hosting schools that had 1500-2500 in attendance. also, the reason that louisiana hosted back in the 80's was because we packed blackham with 8000-9000 people. louisiana hosted several games just based on ticket sales when the other school should have hosted based on record. santa clara was ____ed having to come to lafayette when they should have hosted based on record. its all about making money. the p5 schools sell more tickets. i'm not saying that i like the change, i just understand why the change was made.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RougaWhite&Blue

mid majors yes, but not necessarily g5s…. they like small schools without a football threat. gonzaga, whichita, loyola chicago, butler, marquette, etc, etc… louisiana probably not so much.

---

They like upsets. So no they don’t like Louisiana unfortunately. Haven’t since 1992

. . . g 5’s should refuse to play in the NIT . . .

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GhostofEsquleto

i cant read the article but let me make a SWAG, scientific wild ass guess. its simple, money. the ncaa tournament makes its money from tv revenue. the NIT makes its money from ticket sales, butts in seats if you will. look at attendance, lets use louisiana and mississippi state as examples. ul has about a 2500-3500 attendance record on average for many years while mississippi state who is a middle of the road sec program at best, averages about 7000 per game. more tickets sales means a bigger profit for the NIT. when schools that have a smaller avg. attendance host and advance in the tournament, the NIT will make less money. the NIT now wants to make its money in the first 2 rounds so that if schools that have a lower attendance and that dont travel well advance, they made their money in the early part of the tourney. i dont see it as a hard slap in the face of the g5 as some might. you have to understand that the NIT has been on shaky ground and has almost folded several times in the past 40 plus years because of low ticket sales from hosting schools. its my understanding that the ncaa took over the tournament. the NIT back in the day was a private enterprise and they werent making much money with hosting schools that had 1500-2500 in attendance. also, the reason that louisiana hosted back in the 80's was because we packed blackham with 8000-9000 people. louisiana hosted several games just based on ticket sales when the other school should have hosted based on record. santa clara was ____ed having to come to lafayette when they should have hosted based on record. its all about making money. the p5 schools sell more tickets. i'm not saying that i like the change, i just understand why the change was made.

---

As the ncaa tournament expanded, the nit lost relevancy. You make a great point about ticket sales. But the NIT is on life support and it doesn’t matter how many tickets they sell. Because, pretty soon, if you aren’t in the dance, even the SEC team probably draws 2,000 for their 10-win season that creates apathy.

Nothing creates excitement more than a power conference team with a losing record in post season play. The only time I will watch the NIT anyway is if UL is in it, otherwise I don't really have any interest.

I don't understand why they would do this; NIT is owned and ran by the NCAA. Can't find any info on who the current NIT board of managers are though which could explain it.

Once FB breaks away, MBB will be next, along with WBB. Title IX.