- Joined
- May 27, 2014
- Messages
- 3,174
- Reaction Score
- 15,788
Was discussing this with a buddy the other day who said I'm crazy but, here me out.
I don't find the NIT to be important, interesting or worth the time; especially for those schools who were on the bubble of the NCAAT who get the second-rate prize of the NIT. Was thinking of this idea to make the NIT relevant and have schools actually care about winning it. Here's the idea...
*The school who wins the NIT and the NCAAT will automatically qualify for the NCAAT the next season.
-Example: Texas won the NIT & UVa won the NCAAT in 2019. Both schools would qualify for the NCAAT in 2020.
-Structure: Both schools would be at worst an 11 seed with a play-in (current first four) game in Dayton. In order to do this, the NCAAT field would either need to expand by 2 or cut the field by 2 at the expense of some bubble teams.
-If both Texas and UVa are already solid at-large locks, they obviously would get the highest seed possible based on the selection committee AND you fill the rest of the brackets as usual. Again, it depends on the structure choice, if you're ADDING two (70 schools) you can back-fill the extra play-in games with the last two on the bubble - basically expanding the bubble by 2. If Texas and UVa had bad years, say under .500, they are the last 1-2 teams on that bubble to get in.
-Detractors will say: every team is completely different the next season. Which is true, however, imagine how much underclassmen would fight in the NIT, and obviously the NCAAT, if they knew they would automatically qualify for next year's dance if they win now.
-Should a mediocre or awful team make the NCAAT the next season? Fair point. They don't deserve it. Especially if they do not expand to 70 and stay at 68. But we all know all the NCAA cares about is money. I can see this idea making some serious cash for the NCAA and conferences if they can market the NIT and actually get an audience. Imagine if UConn automatically qualified for the 2015 tourney b/c of winning the NCAAT in 2014. We may not have deserved it but would we have complained? Sure, someone on the bubble will cry foul but the bubble is subjective anyway. You can argue the P5 programs will then dominate the NIT, possibly true, but just DO NOT change the current structure of the NIT. Let the NEC and MAAC regular season champs, for instance, still get that shot to win the NIT.
Must admit, I have not thought every possible scenario out. I'm sure there are potential issues involved. But at the end of the day, it makes college basketball a little more exciting and maybe you get people actually attending these NIT games on their home courts (i.e. Storrs in 2015 I heard was pretty flat...not positive though, I wasn't there). Would have a spike in viewership and likely wagering on these games. I see it as a win-win for the NCAA/conferences and both big/small programs.
*TBH, I stole this idea from the European soccer model where they have an NCAAT and NIT-like system (Champions League #1 and Europa League #2). Basically the best-of-the best dominate Champions League like NCAAT and the second tier teams generally battle for Europa League - NIT. For years, Europa League meant nothing other than a shiny trophy. A few years back, they made Europa League an automatic entry into next season's Champions League - along with Champions League winners also with an automatic qualifier. Pretty clear that both ratings and effort levels have spiked for the Europa League*
I don't find the NIT to be important, interesting or worth the time; especially for those schools who were on the bubble of the NCAAT who get the second-rate prize of the NIT. Was thinking of this idea to make the NIT relevant and have schools actually care about winning it. Here's the idea...
*The school who wins the NIT and the NCAAT will automatically qualify for the NCAAT the next season.
-Example: Texas won the NIT & UVa won the NCAAT in 2019. Both schools would qualify for the NCAAT in 2020.
-Structure: Both schools would be at worst an 11 seed with a play-in (current first four) game in Dayton. In order to do this, the NCAAT field would either need to expand by 2 or cut the field by 2 at the expense of some bubble teams.
-If both Texas and UVa are already solid at-large locks, they obviously would get the highest seed possible based on the selection committee AND you fill the rest of the brackets as usual. Again, it depends on the structure choice, if you're ADDING two (70 schools) you can back-fill the extra play-in games with the last two on the bubble - basically expanding the bubble by 2. If Texas and UVa had bad years, say under .500, they are the last 1-2 teams on that bubble to get in.
-Detractors will say: every team is completely different the next season. Which is true, however, imagine how much underclassmen would fight in the NIT, and obviously the NCAAT, if they knew they would automatically qualify for next year's dance if they win now.
-Should a mediocre or awful team make the NCAAT the next season? Fair point. They don't deserve it. Especially if they do not expand to 70 and stay at 68. But we all know all the NCAA cares about is money. I can see this idea making some serious cash for the NCAA and conferences if they can market the NIT and actually get an audience. Imagine if UConn automatically qualified for the 2015 tourney b/c of winning the NCAAT in 2014. We may not have deserved it but would we have complained? Sure, someone on the bubble will cry foul but the bubble is subjective anyway. You can argue the P5 programs will then dominate the NIT, possibly true, but just DO NOT change the current structure of the NIT. Let the NEC and MAAC regular season champs, for instance, still get that shot to win the NIT.
Must admit, I have not thought every possible scenario out. I'm sure there are potential issues involved. But at the end of the day, it makes college basketball a little more exciting and maybe you get people actually attending these NIT games on their home courts (i.e. Storrs in 2015 I heard was pretty flat...not positive though, I wasn't there). Would have a spike in viewership and likely wagering on these games. I see it as a win-win for the NCAA/conferences and both big/small programs.
*TBH, I stole this idea from the European soccer model where they have an NCAAT and NIT-like system (Champions League #1 and Europa League #2). Basically the best-of-the best dominate Champions League like NCAAT and the second tier teams generally battle for Europa League - NIT. For years, Europa League meant nothing other than a shiny trophy. A few years back, they made Europa League an automatic entry into next season's Champions League - along with Champions League winners also with an automatic qualifier. Pretty clear that both ratings and effort levels have spiked for the Europa League*