NIT, CIT and CBI Tournaments - Page 2 - Basketball Forum : Professional and College Basketball Forums
BasketballForum.com is the premier basketball Forum on the internet. Registered Users do not see the above ads.
User Tag List

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 03-04-2013, 01:22 PM   #16 (permalink)
-PREMIUM MEMBER-
Photobucket
 
UVM Hoop Cat's Avatar
 

Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Boston
Posts: 22,622
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1483 Post(s)
Re: NIT, CIT and CBI Tournaments

Pitt kind of surprised me by playing in (and winning) the CBI last year.
__________________
"Let's win this game for all the small schools that never had a chance to get here"
- Hoosiers,
& UVM mens basketball NCAA's 2005
UVM Hoop Cat is online now   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Old 03-04-2013, 01:58 PM   #17 (permalink)
The Invisible Iron Fist
Photobucket
 
Seth's Avatar
 

Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Boston, MA
Posts: 1,253
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Re: NIT, CIT and CBI Tournaments

Not sure if it's going to happen, but I'd love to see BU at the CBI. I know it's not the ultimate goal, etc., but the BU win over Morehead State at Case was one of the most fun games I've attended in my time as a BU fan. It's would be a great way for a team with no seniors to keep playing together to prepare for next season!
__________________
Go BU!
Seth is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-04-2013, 02:36 PM   #18 (permalink)
Star
 
ccd494's Avatar
 

Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 2,662
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 185 Post(s)
Re: NIT, CIT and CBI Tournaments

Right, my point wasn't about TSU being ineligible- it was the NIT not passing over TSU to the next highest finisher (in this case Southern or Arkansas-Pine Bluff). They just opted to exclude the SWAC entirely.
ccd494 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 03-04-2013, 02:47 PM   #19 (permalink)
-PREMIUM MEMBER-
Photobucket
 
UVM Hoop Cat's Avatar
 

Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Boston
Posts: 22,622
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1483 Post(s)
Re: NIT, CIT and CBI Tournaments

Quote:
Originally Posted by ccd494 View Post
Right, my point wasn't about TSU being ineligible- it was the NIT not passing over TSU to the next highest finisher (in this case Southern or Arkansas-Pine Bluff). They just opted to exclude the SWAC entirely.
Gotchya. I feel that's valid since the NIT auto-bid doesn't state it goes to teams that finished second.

I agree with your overall point though- the NCAA really doesn't want to reward or include mid-majors in the NIT. I think giving the regular season winner the auto-bid was a solid move by the NCAA, but I don't see them ever going out of their way to accomodate mid-majors if they don't have to.
__________________
"Let's win this game for all the small schools that never had a chance to get here"
- Hoosiers,
& UVM mens basketball NCAA's 2005
UVM Hoop Cat is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 03-04-2013, 02:50 PM   #20 (permalink)
Veteran
 

Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 1,431
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 36 Post(s)
Re: NIT, CIT and CBI Tournaments

Remember this is the same group (NIT) that gave a 16-16 (5-11 ACC record) UNC team a home game over a 22-10 (12-6 CAA record) William & Mary team a couple years ago. They'll jump through holes, nets, and whatever else to not only get the BCS teams in the field but also protect them with undeserved home games.
And do we have to bring up Oral Roberts who was probably the first or second team left out of last year's field, but only nabbed a #4 seed in the NIT??
shupioneers1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-04-2013, 02:53 PM   #21 (permalink)
-PREMIUM MEMBER-
Photobucket
 
UVM Hoop Cat's Avatar
 

Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Boston
Posts: 22,622
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1483 Post(s)
Re: NIT, CIT and CBI Tournaments

Quote:
Originally Posted by Seth View Post
Not sure if it's going to happen, but I'd love to see BU at the CBI. I know it's not the ultimate goal, etc., but the BU win over Morehead State at Case was one of the most fun games I've attended in my time as a BU fan. It's would be a great way for a team with no seniors to keep playing together to prepare for next season!
That was a great win. Morehead State had Kenneth Faried at the time.
__________________
"Let's win this game for all the small schools that never had a chance to get here"
- Hoosiers,
& UVM mens basketball NCAA's 2005
UVM Hoop Cat is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 03-04-2013, 03:13 PM   #22 (permalink)
Veteran
 
GoCatsGo's Avatar
 

Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Catamount Country
Posts: 1,819
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 97 Post(s)
Re: NIT, CIT and CBI Tournaments

Quote:
Originally Posted by shupioneers1 View Post
Remember this is the same group (NIT) that gave a 16-16 (5-11 ACC record) UNC team a home game over a 22-10 (12-6 CAA record) William & Mary team a couple years ago. They'll jump through holes, nets, and whatever else to not only get the BCS teams in the field but also protect them with undeserved home games.
And do we have to bring up Oral Roberts who was probably the first or second team left out of last year's field, but only nabbed a #4 seed in the NIT??
This, though, is more justifiable. Like all things, the NIT exists because of revenue. Unlike the NCAA Tournament, where you have designated neutral sites, because you have the on-campus locations they absolutely skew the seedings to favor teams that *will make them money.* It's not so much about protection of BCS schools to insure their advancement in the tournament, it's more a function of adding an additional data set (the ability to host games and sell tickets) to the selection and seeding process.

It's bad for the competitive integrity of the tournament, but good for the health of the tournament.
GoCatsGo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-04-2013, 03:18 PM   #23 (permalink)
Veteran
 

Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 1,431
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 36 Post(s)
Re: NIT, CIT and CBI Tournaments

The thing about that UNC/William & Mary game, granted 3 years ago, but they didn't even play that game in the Smith Center, they played it in Carmichael Arena where the women's team plays. I don't think their would have been that much difference in the number of people at the game had it taken place @ William & Mary.
shupioneers1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-04-2013, 06:12 PM   #24 (permalink)
Veteran
 

Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 1,384
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 58 Post(s)
Re: NIT, CIT and CBI Tournaments

If Hartford is asked to play in the CBI tourney I assume they will take it. It would be a great learning experience to get another game or two in a tourney atmosphere for these underclassmen. I hope they get the opportunity.....assuming we don't get into the big dance of course.
lsbal84 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-04-2013, 08:56 PM   #25 (permalink)
Player
 

Join Date: Oct 2004
Age: 30
Posts: 799
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Re: NIT, CIT and CBI Tournaments

Quote:
Originally Posted by chatster View Post
NIT (32 Teams): Stony Brook, only with an upset loss in the America East tournament.
CBI (16 Teams) : No America East team.
CIT (32 Teams from non-BCS Conferences): Vermont, Albany or Hartford, depending on which of them plays in the America East championship game.

Boston University’s season probably is over, unless Vermont, Albany and Hartford decline invitations to the CIT. In 2012, Buffalo, Yale, Fairfield, Manhattan and Albany were the only schools from the northeast in the CIT field. Unlikely that more than one school from America East will be invited to the CIT.
BU will get an invite before Albany or Hartford.
BU Fan 84 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-04-2013, 09:04 PM   #26 (permalink)
Benchwarmer
 

Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Maryland via New Hampshire
Age: 32
Posts: 149
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Re: NIT, CIT and CBI Tournaments

Quote:
Originally Posted by ccd494 View Post
Right, my point wasn't about TSU being ineligible- it was the NIT not passing over TSU to the next highest finisher (in this case Southern or Arkansas-Pine Bluff). They just opted to exclude the SWAC entirely.
This is 100% in line with the NCAA policy regarding autobids. The NCAA didn't bar UConn from the Big East tournament, the Big East did that themselves because if an ineligible team wins your tournament, it wastes the autobid. The NCAA never lets those bids transfer. It's the same logic with NIT autobids.

Sadly, the SWAC did this to themselves. If a conference declares that teams are ineligible for their regular season title before the season and that they won't represent a place in the standings, then they can allow the conference regular season title, and its postseason awards, to go to the best eligible team. This has become common practice in FCS football to punish departing teams (Old Dominion and UMass) or teams in violation of conference, but not NCAA scholarship rules (Fordham). I think that this first wave of NIT bids squandered by APR violators will cause this practice to spill over into hoops.

Last edited by Rhett1; 03-04-2013 at 09:06 PM. Reason: typo
Rhett1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-04-2013, 09:36 PM   #27 (permalink)
Benchwarmer
 

Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Maryland via New Hampshire
Age: 32
Posts: 149
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Re: NIT, CIT and CBI Tournaments

Oh, and I can't believe this hasn't been mentioned, but sub-.500 teams are ineligible to be selected at-large for any of the 4 tournaments. When it comes to the CBI & CIT, looking at the RPI is almost useless because you start running out of teams that are eligible.

Right now, BU's Real RPI is 148 (in a world where there are 148 post-season slots), but 15 of the teams ahead of them are currently under-.500 and ineligible for selection (plus a handful more within a game of the drop-zone and likely facing high-seeds in a conference tourney in a week or so). By RPI alone, you have to go down to #167 (Kent State) to find enough eligible teams. When you take out the APR violators and skip UConn, Towson, and Jacksonville State, the last team in becomes Hartford at #174. At that point, there's only 15 teams with winning records left. When you remember that some eligible schools decline these bids, then there isn't really that much to choose from.

BU, UVM and Albany will keep playing if they want to and I suspect Hartford will as well.
Rhett1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-05-2013, 08:20 AM   #28 (permalink)
-PREMIUM MEMBER-
Photobucket
 
UVM Hoop Cat's Avatar
 

Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Boston
Posts: 22,622
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1483 Post(s)
Re: NIT, CIT and CBI Tournaments

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rhett1 View Post
Oh, and I can't believe this hasn't been mentioned, but sub-.500 teams are ineligible to be selected at-large for any of the 4 tournaments. When it comes to the CBI & CIT, looking at the RPI is almost useless because you start running out of teams that are eligible.

Right now, BU's Real RPI is 148 (in a world where there are 148 post-season slots), but 15 of the teams ahead of them are currently under-.500 and ineligible for selection (plus a handful more within a game of the drop-zone and likely facing high-seeds in a conference tourney in a week or so). By RPI alone, you have to go down to #167 (Kent State) to find enough eligible teams. When you take out the APR violators and skip UConn, Towson, and Jacksonville State, the last team in becomes Hartford at #174. At that point, there's only 15 teams with winning records left. When you remember that some eligible schools decline these bids, then there isn't really that much to choose from.

BU, UVM and Albany will keep playing if they want to and I suspect Hartford will as well.
I did not not know that about sub-.500 teams being ineligible for post-season tourneys, and I'm not saying I'm disagreeing with you, but is this a standard that has been changed recently?

In 08-09 when we played in the CBI we lost to Oregon State, who went on to win and finished the season 18-18, but they were 13-17 entering the CBI.
__________________
"Let's win this game for all the small schools that never had a chance to get here"
- Hoosiers,
& UVM mens basketball NCAA's 2005
UVM Hoop Cat is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 03-05-2013, 08:51 AM   #29 (permalink)
Star
 
usslider's Avatar
 

Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 2,861
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 115 Post(s)
Re: NIT, CIT and CBI Tournaments

Quote:
Originally Posted by Seth View Post
Not sure if it's going to happen, but I'd love to see BU at the CBI. I know it's not the ultimate goal, etc., but the BU win over Morehead State at Case was one of the most fun games I've attended in my time as a BU fan. It's would be a great way for a team with no seniors to keep playing together to prepare for next season!

I agree. I think we'd be competitive and have a chance to win 1 or 2 games. I hope we try to host one
__________________
~v^v~GO TERRIERS~v^v~

My point guard is faster than your point guard.
usslider is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-05-2013, 08:59 AM   #30 (permalink)
Rookie
 

Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 25
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8 Post(s)
Re: NIT, CIT and CBI Tournaments

By my count, as of the end of play on March 4, there were 182 Division One teams with at least a .500 record. Take out the schools ineligible for post-season play, six of whom currently have a record of at least .500, and that leaves 176 teams now eligible for post-season play. Factor in remaining regular season games and conference tournaments, and there will be some teams that become eligible and others that may slip below .500.

The NIT favors teams from the top conferences and will take an America East team only if Stony Brook loses in the tournament. The CBI tries to get as many teams from top conferences as it can; but perhaps Vermont, considering its history, would be considered for the CBI this year.

The CIT takes teams only from non-BCS conferences, and that’s where an America East team other than Stony Brook should land. RPI may have some bearing on selection for the lesser tournaments, but it would not guarantee that four teams from America East would be selected for the CIT. In 2012, only five teams from the northeast part of the nation were selected for the CIT. I'd guess that they'd try to take one team from each of America East, Colonal, Ivy, Metro Atlantic, Northeast and Patriot in order to fill out their field for 2013 before they started to go for two or more teams from any of those conferences.

These are the teams ineligible for post-season tournaments and their current records:

Arkansas-Pine Bluff (16-14), California-Riverside (6-23), Cal State Bakersfield (12-16), Connecticut (19-9), Jacksonville State (17-11), Mississippi Valley State (5-23), North Carolina-Wilmington (10-20), Texas A&M-Corpus Christi (6-21), Texas Southern (17-14), Toledo (13-13) and Towson (18-13).

To give you an idea of what teams made the lesser post-season tournaments in 2012, here they are, with record and RPI listed.

NIT: Marshall (21-13, 43), Oral Roberts (27-6, 51), UCF (22-10, 54), Akron (22-11, 55), Middle Tennessee (25-6, 56), Miami, FL (19-12, 60), Mississippi (20-13, 61), Oregon (22-9, 63), Northwestern (18-13, 65), Drexel (27-6, 66), Nevada (26-6, 67), Seton Hall (20-12, 68), St. Joseph's (20-13, 69), Washington (21-10, 71), Northern Iowa (19-13, 73), Mississippi State (21-11, 75), Arizona (23-11, 76), Massachusetts (22-11, 77), LSU (18-14, 84), Cleveland State (22-10, 85), La Salle (21-12, 86), Tennessee (18-14, 87), Bucknell (24-9, 89), Minnesota (19-14, 90), Valparaiso (22-11, 95), Stanford (21-11, 97), Illinois State (20-13, 100), Texas-Arlington (24-8, 110), Iowa (17-16, 130), Stony Brook (22-9, 152), Savannah State (21-11, 191)

CBI: Wyoming (20-11, 83), Princeton (19-11, 88), Pittsburgh (17-16, 96), Pennsylvania (19-12, 98), Butler (20-14, 112), TCU (17-14, 113), Wisconsin-Milwaukee (20-13, 124), Evansville (16-15, 131), Oregon State (19-14, 132), San Francisco (20-13, 136), Western Illinois (18-14, 150), Delaware (18-13, 153), Quinnipiac (18-13, 155), Wofford (19-13, 177), North Dakota State (17-13, 183), Washington State (15-16, 184)

CIT: Weber State (24-6, 70), Buffalo (19-10, 79), Robert Morris (24-10, 99), Yale (19-9, 102), Old Dominion (20-13, 103), Kent State (21-11, 106), Tennessee State (20-12, 107), Fairfield (19-14, 115), Loyola Marymount (19-12, 117), UC Santa Barbara (20-10, 118), Indiana State (18-14, 129), Mercer (22-11, 133), Drake (17-15, 134), Tennessee Tech (19-13, 137), South Carolina Upstate (20-12, 139), Georgia State (21-11, 140), American (20-11, 141), Oakland (17-15, 142), Utah State (17-15, 143), Idaho (18-13, 146), Manhattan (20-12, 149), CSU-Fullerton (21-9, 157), Bowling Green (16-15, 158), Rice (17-15, 171), McNeese State (17-15, 174), Coastal Carolina (19-11, 181), Louisiana-Lafayette (16-15, 185), CSU-Bakersfield (16-14, 212), Albany (19-14, 214), Utah Valley (20-12, 230), North Dakota (17-14, 242), Toledo (18-16, 246)
chatster is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 06:51 AM.



User Alert System provided by Advanced User Tagging v3.1.0 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2014 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Copyright © 2002 — 2013 BasketballBoards.net.

Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.6.1