Been following the bracketology stuff, a few still have UD as a very long shot for NCAA. However, more likely an invite comes from NIT (road games) or the new Vegas tourney (CBC) - TV event. Which one? Interest? Would anyone portal before it starts?
Been following the bracketology stuff, a few still have UD as a very long shot for NCAA. However, more likely an invite comes from NIT (road games) or the new Vegas tourney (CBC) - TV event. Which one? Interest? Would anyone portal before it starts?
The Vegas Crown tourney doesn’t start until about two? weeks from today, players entering the portal could be a problem.
Fox wanted some postseason tv inventory, Fox's affiliation with the Big 10, Big East, and Big 12 is hurting the NIT.
Good commentary:
https://awfulannouncing.com/fox/nit-gutted-college-basketball-crown.html
You’ve got DePaul & Butler each at 14-19, Arizona State at 13-19, and Colorado with a whopping 20 losses in the Crown.
This is about inventory, not quality.
GW and maybe SLU getting invited to the Crown may just have been due to confusion/chaos with the Crown being new/having no established protocol.
And maybe you don't want to say no to the NIT for fear of ticking off the NCAA.
Maybe both tournaments were contacting schools at the same time.
It's a competition now between the NCAA/NIT/ESPN and the Crown/Fox.
NCAA goes first. NIT goes next, however Big 10, Big East, and Big 12 are obligated to send two teams each to the CBC so that diminishes the pick of teams as does the fact that schools are now opting out of non-NCAA post-season (e.g. UD in 2024) makes the pool even smaller. So yes, it is just fill. Then in the background you have the CBI. End of the day very few teams get to end their season with a win... why not be that team?
NCAA goes first. NIT goes next
Do we know for certain that the NIT gets to pick teams before the Crown? Maybe it's a free-for-all.
As soon as the Selection Sunday show is over, maybe both the NIT and Crown are scrambling to land the best remaining and willing teams.
I'm guessing it happens even earlier than the selection show with the teams that they know will not make the tournament.
NIT picks first but the other tourneys (CBI and CBC are making calls - see South Alabama/UC Riverside) CBC has contractual agreements with Big 12, Big 10, Big East and it looks like the MW. So those teams will not/can not go to the NIT - But from what I have read, the NIT goes next to fill in the field.
Someone on Facebook posted that UD was invited to the CBC but turned it down for the NIT. Does anyone know if this rumor is true?
David Jablonski mentioned it in his article today on the DDN. My guess as to why it was declined is because the NIT starts sooner and the CBC would be happening mid-transfer portal window.
Heard that, too, and it was apparently the reason why a couple of others declined an invite.
Just noticed that UC Irvine won 28 games and ended up in the NIT. I looked at their schedule and, of course, most of their games are on the west coast. So, I don’t have any reference of who was tough or not, in their schedule. But, still, that’s a lot of wins to be left out of the NCAA tournament.
The selection committee’s composition and “selection process” is long overdue for overhaul. For starts I would like to see Athletic Directors and Conference commissioners replaced with “bracketologists” and teams should be required to finish at least at .500 or above in conference play to get in. Also if you win your conference tournament championship you should be completely in and not having to do a play-in game. What made the tournament enjoyable in the past was seeing non P5 teams who played their hearts out all season getting a chance to play on a national stage playing big name teams.
With the direction entirety of D1 basketball/sports has been going the last 5 years, I find it hard to see any meaningful improvements. But the expansion of the CFB playoff to 12 teams does show it change can happen for the better.
If you follow Mark Adams on Facebook, he made a very good post about his thoughts on the tournament and the NET:
In the future, Cinderella will only be a long forgotten footnote.
Will this hurt the popularity/tv ratings of the ncaat?
I am pretty sure MLB's tv ratings and attendance are way down. But hey, the MLB owners and the MLB players are all fat and happy, so they don’t care. As long as NY, LA, Boston, Philly, Atlanta, Chicago, Houston, SF, etc. are winning, it's all good, who cares about the other teams?
It’s not impossible to bring a bit more continuity and less player movement back to college sports. With compensation being involved, there’s even more reason for a simple change. It’s time for player contracts. These would have more teeth than renewable scholarships. If 4 year player contracts were introduced, it would be a win, win, win. It would be great for schools, players, and fans. I’ve been beating the contract theory drum for a while. Now, there’s more of a reason for it. And , it appears that others are discussing it. Someone spoke with a di coach who mentioned it. It could be a wonderful unintended consequence of player compensation.
Sure looks like the p4 will kill the ncaat's popularity.
MLB attendance has been going down for over a decade on average, there are occasional upticks. The 2023 World Series was the least watched on record.
People don't watch the ncaat because they want to see the p4 dominate.
There are many things that plague MLB. The pace of play doesn’t help. Kids are now playing different sports. The lack of a meaningful spending cap. Lots of problems.
There are many things that plague MLB. The pace of play doesn’t help. Kids are now playing different sports. The lack of a meaningful spending cap. Lots of problems.
No, that's all a bunch of bs. People love following a winner. If they can figure out a way to even out the payrolls a bit more, the attendance and tv viewership will bounce back at least somewhat.
The salary floor proposal by the players in the last CBA negotiation was a great idea, but the owners of the crappy teams are happy fielding crappy teams and collecting the revenue sharing $. MLB needs to step in and correct these issues.
If the crappy team owners don't want to do the salary floor idea and compete, then force them to sell their teams to somebody that does want to spend and compete.
You must not be following participation numbers for kids. Lacrosse has taken away a huge chunk of kids. Others just aren’t interested. It’s not just salary floor and cap issues. Kids aren’t interested in the game. Older fans are less interested because of the spending issues. BS? You’re missing the mark just as baseball has.
