Yeah, I like this and could get behind it. It has an element of the old "Bracket Buster" to it
NCAA / NIT Idea
- Thread starter ISU_phoria
- Start date
The only expansion I could tolerate, maybe, is going to 72. Make all the 16s in First Four, add two at-large to First Four.
It wouldn't stop the whining for the fringe at-large teams, but would reduce it by two.
It sucks for the 16s, but at least it's balanced.
Why the love for the NIT? It's become the "Participation Trophy" of NCAA Hoops. It's a lifeline for coaches who are borderline getting canned at schools that don't consistently get NCAA bids.
I prefer a 64 team NCAA Tournament. No play-in games. But since we are already at 68 and there is talk of expansion, maybe it's time for the NIT to cease.
If expansion of the NCAA is inevitable, I prefer first round byes for top seeds. So if they decide on 80 teams, then give top 48 seeds byes and have bottom 32 seeds play on Tues at higher seeds home court.
IMO 96 teams would be a joke and is just money grab mentality by AD's and job security mentality by Coaches.
I prefer a 64 team NCAA Tournament. No play-in games. But since we are already at 68 and there is talk of expansion, maybe it's time for the NIT to cease.
If expansion of the NCAA is inevitable, I prefer first round byes for top seeds. So if they decide on 80 teams, then give top 48 seeds byes and have bottom 32 seeds play on Tues at higher seeds home court.
IMO 96 teams would be a joke and is just money grab mentality by AD's and job security mentality by Coaches.
Personally I’d rather just expand the NCAA Tournament to 96 teams and eliminate the NIT altogether than try to convolutedly tie the NCAA Tournament and NIT together.
Do I actually want to do that? No - personally I’d rather drop the NCAA Tournament back to 64 teams and eliminate the NIT altogether.
Let’s face it - the reason why we’re even having this conversation is because nobody wants to admit what the NIT actually is: functionally obsolete. Let’s face it: in the era of NIL and transfer portal nobody wants to play in a meaningless tournament where the only real value of it is whatever prestige it held 50+ years ago. And this discussion is just avoiding what really needs to be done: shooting the dying horse in the head.
Do I actually want to do that? No - personally I’d rather drop the NCAA Tournament back to 64 teams and eliminate the NIT altogether.
Let’s face it - the reason why we’re even having this conversation is because nobody wants to admit what the NIT actually is: functionally obsolete. Let’s face it: in the era of NIL and transfer portal nobody wants to play in a meaningless tournament where the only real value of it is whatever prestige it held 50+ years ago. And this discussion is just avoiding what really needs to be done: shooting the dying horse in the head.
NIT should start at on Mon night after selection Sunday starting at 32 teams. It should progress as 8 pods of 4 and conclude after 2 rounds (Mon/Tues) so there are 8 remaining teams. Those 8 teams then fill the last 8 at large bids to the NCAA tournament to get it to 64.
56 bids to the tournament awarded on selection Sunday. All 8 10/11 seed bids awarded at conclusion of NIT.
Boom now have 88 teams get an opportunity to play. 10/11 seeds have to win 8 games to win a natty.
56 bids to the tournament awarded on selection Sunday. All 8 10/11 seed bids awarded at conclusion of NIT.
Boom now have 88 teams get an opportunity to play. 10/11 seeds have to win 8 games to win a natty.
If you go from 68 to 72, it doesn't matter who plays in round zero play-in games, you add four bubble teams not two.
If you want to expand, no more play in games with 16 seeds make the last four at larges played for. 16 teams get a shot, win Tuesday and Wednesday and you're in the actual tourney. This would be a play in tourney and would NOT be considered an NCAA tourney win
While there were a lot of stolen bids this year, I don't really care. A team wins their conference tourney - they're in. I don't care if the Pitts or Seton Halls (of this year) don't get in. Those teams can complain about being snubbed, but they had chances to play their way in all year.
All 16 seeds should play Thu/Fri. The last at large teams can have the play-in games, though I would prefer they just went back to 64.
(I'm not sure I'm disagreeing with you or not
)
Neutral sites or one team in each pod is host?
Transportation and scouting of opponents is going to be pretty tight turn around from selection Sunday to Monday games
The NIT is clearly on its way out. The NCAA tournament is clearly on its way to expansion -- there is just too much money on the table to stay at 68 teams when more would equal more $$$.
I love the 64-team format, but it is already gone and its inferior 68-team successor probably goes next. My dream would be they essentially merge the NCAA tournament and the NIT.
A 96-team single-elimination tournament that would work something like this...
-- BOTH the #1 seed in conference tournaments and the tournament champions earn an automatic bid (which is designed to give something to the low-major conferences here)
-- four regions with seeds #1 through #24
-- what are now four-team "pods" in the first and second round become six-team "pods" in the first, second, and third round... seeds #1 through #8 are "safe" through a bye, seeds #9 through #24 have to play an extra game to make it into what now looks like the 64-team structure with six rounds
-- that requires 32 games... play 16 each on Tuesday and Wednesday this week (exactly like on Friday and Saturday) so the "madness" of the first "weekend" is now extended into six days
I went through and seeded this using the Torvik WAB rankings. You can see the full list below (red = P6 auto; yellow = P6 at-large bid; green = non-P6 auto; blue = non-P6 at-large bid).
I know the list is long but a few fun things to point out...
TEAMS THAT MISSED THE TOURNAMENT NOW RECEIVING AT-LARGE BIDS
#11 Oklahoma
#12 Seton Hall
#13 Providence
#13 Kansas St.
#13 St. John's
#14 Pittsburgh
#15 Indiana
#15 Ohio St.
#15 Syracuse
#15 Iowa
#16 Mississippi
#16 Cincinnati
#17 Butler
LAST FOUR OUT
Memphis
Utah
Villanova
Wake Forest
TEAMS THAT MISSED THE TOURNAMENT NOW RECIEVING AUTOMATIC BIDS
#7 Indiana St.
#11 Princeton
#16 South Florida
#17 Richmond
#17 Appalachian St.
#18 UC Irvine
#19 High Point
#20 Eastern Washington
#20 Quinnipiac
#21 Sam Houston St.
#21 Toledo
#22 Norfolk St.
#23 Central Connecticut
#23 Eastern Kentucky
#24 Little Rock
BID COUNT BY CONFERENCE
Iowa St. would be a #1 seed with something like this six-team pod...
#1 = Iowa St.
-
#16 = South Florida
#17 = Appalachian St.
#8 = Drake
-
#9 = Northwestern
#24 = Little Rock
...to pick a few random teams off those lines.
I love the 64-team format, but it is already gone and its inferior 68-team successor probably goes next. My dream would be they essentially merge the NCAA tournament and the NIT.
A 96-team single-elimination tournament that would work something like this...
-- BOTH the #1 seed in conference tournaments and the tournament champions earn an automatic bid (which is designed to give something to the low-major conferences here)
-- four regions with seeds #1 through #24
-- what are now four-team "pods" in the first and second round become six-team "pods" in the first, second, and third round... seeds #1 through #8 are "safe" through a bye, seeds #9 through #24 have to play an extra game to make it into what now looks like the 64-team structure with six rounds
-- that requires 32 games... play 16 each on Tuesday and Wednesday this week (exactly like on Friday and Saturday) so the "madness" of the first "weekend" is now extended into six days
I went through and seeded this using the Torvik WAB rankings. You can see the full list below (red = P6 auto; yellow = P6 at-large bid; green = non-P6 auto; blue = non-P6 at-large bid).
I know the list is long but a few fun things to point out...
TEAMS THAT MISSED THE TOURNAMENT NOW RECEIVING AT-LARGE BIDS
#11 Oklahoma
#12 Seton Hall
#13 Providence
#13 Kansas St.
#13 St. John's
#14 Pittsburgh
#15 Indiana
#15 Ohio St.
#15 Syracuse
#15 Iowa
#16 Mississippi
#16 Cincinnati
#17 Butler
LAST FOUR OUT
Memphis
Utah
Villanova
Wake Forest
TEAMS THAT MISSED THE TOURNAMENT NOW RECIEVING AUTOMATIC BIDS
#7 Indiana St.
#11 Princeton
#16 South Florida
#17 Richmond
#17 Appalachian St.
#18 UC Irvine
#19 High Point
#20 Eastern Washington
#20 Quinnipiac
#21 Sam Houston St.
#21 Toledo
#22 Norfolk St.
#23 Central Connecticut
#23 Eastern Kentucky
#24 Little Rock
BID COUNT BY CONFERENCE
| Conference | P6? | Bids |
| B12 | YES | 11 |
| B10 | YES | 9 |
| SEC | YES | 9 |
| ACC | YES | 7 |
| BE | YES | 7 |
| MWC | NO | 6 |
| P12 | YES | 4 |
| A10 | NO | 3 |
| Amer | NO | 3 |
| ASun | NO | 2 |
| BSky | NO | 2 |
| BSth | NO | 2 |
| BW | NO | 2 |
| CUSA | NO | 2 |
| Ivy | NO | 2 |
| MAAC | NO | 2 |
| MAC | NO | 2 |
| MEAC | NO | 2 |
| MVC | NO | 2 |
| NEC | NO | 2 |
| OVC | NO | 2 |
| SB | NO | 2 |
| WCC | NO | 2 |
| AE | NO | 1 |
| CAA | NO | 1 |
| Horz | NO | 1 |
| Pat | NO | 1 |
| SC | NO | 1 |
| Slnd | NO | 1 |
| Sum | NO | 1 |
| SWAC | NO | 1 |
| WAC | NO | 1 |
Iowa St. would be a #1 seed with something like this six-team pod...
#1 = Iowa St.
-
#16 = South Florida
#17 = Appalachian St.
#8 = Drake
-
#9 = Northwestern
#24 = Little Rock
...to pick a few random teams off those lines.
Last edited:
I would like to see the tournament expanded to 96 teams with the top 32 getting a bye. Add a rule that any regular season conference champion gets in if they have at least 28 division one wins and a .780 winning percentage. I see several advantages of this system:
1. Teams 33-96 would have a better chance to get at least one win in the tournament. Any team that gets the first win may have the momentum to go on a run.
2. The top teams will have better competition in their first games resulting in more of them getting knocked out early. I don't think that a #1 seed should have such an easy path to the Sweet 16.
3. Would get more mid-major and small conference teams in the tournament.
4. Would get rid of the dreaded First 4.
5. It would make filing out the brackets more fun.
1. Teams 33-96 would have a better chance to get at least one win in the tournament. Any team that gets the first win may have the momentum to go on a run.
2. The top teams will have better competition in their first games resulting in more of them getting knocked out early. I don't think that a #1 seed should have such an easy path to the Sweet 16.
3. Would get more mid-major and small conference teams in the tournament.
4. Would get rid of the dreaded First 4.
5. It would make filing out the brackets more fun.
I would do top 8 rankings in NET each (or some other metric based qualifier) host a Pod. No Neutrals.
We've probably got another year or two of it being "college sports" based on current trajectory.
32 conferences. 64 spots. Each regular season champion and each conference tournament champion. Seems pretty simple.
I guess with the PAC dissolving you can get down to 31 conferences and maybe a couple at large bids then.
To go to more than 68 is ridiculous. The 69th best team has zero shot at a national title.
I guess with the PAC dissolving you can get down to 31 conferences and maybe a couple at large bids then.
To go to more than 68 is ridiculous. The 69th best team has zero shot at a national title.
Not sure how many of you follow European soccer's Champion's League, Europa League and Europa conference.
It's basically Big Dance, NIT and CBI but based on previous year's results. My team (Roma) is probably pretty historically comparable to ISU basketball, usually somewhere 20th to 50th but rarely top 10 and rarely horrible out of hundreds of teams.
When Roma makes Champion's League (about half the time, maybe slightly more) it's obviously exciting...but when they frequently make Europa League and actually are a favorite to win it, in some ways its just as exciting. When they miss Europa League it's pretty deflating. They recently made a successful coaching change and it was precisely because of fear they might miss Europa League (NIT) and it's already a success having likely captured it for next year and playing well in it this year (final 8).
Maybe it's that this NIT style thing lasts all season, maybe it's the international bragging rights, for some reason it still matters even when big name teams like Liverpool or AC Milan play in it.
It's basically Big Dance, NIT and CBI but based on previous year's results. My team (Roma) is probably pretty historically comparable to ISU basketball, usually somewhere 20th to 50th but rarely top 10 and rarely horrible out of hundreds of teams.
When Roma makes Champion's League (about half the time, maybe slightly more) it's obviously exciting...but when they frequently make Europa League and actually are a favorite to win it, in some ways its just as exciting. When they miss Europa League it's pretty deflating. They recently made a successful coaching change and it was precisely because of fear they might miss Europa League (NIT) and it's already a success having likely captured it for next year and playing well in it this year (final 8).
Maybe it's that this NIT style thing lasts all season, maybe it's the international bragging rights, for some reason it still matters even when big name teams like Liverpool or AC Milan play in it.
Last edited:
The NCAA tournament is about a lot more than just who can win the national title. If a lower ceded team makes a run to the Sweet 16, that is a huge deal for that school. Sometimes a team like Northern Iowa can beat overall #1 Kansas. That's what makes the tournament great. If you want to only include teams that could conceivably win the national title, the field could be reduced to 12 teams. If the tournament was increased to 96 teams, it would still be only 27% of D1. Adding 32 additional teams would make the NCAA's better because there would be more games and more competitive games. It would make it more of an accomplishment to reach the Final 4 or win the whole thing.
