Now that the NCAA and NIT fields have been set

[615dawg]

don't forget about the inagural College Basketball Invitational .. I'm on the edge of my seat waiting for the 16-team field to be announced

http://www.gazellegroup.com/cbi/index_main.htm

 

[itawambadog]

wow they really want to make sure everyone plays post season ball.

 

[UpTheMiddlex3Punt]

[No message]

 

[Todd4State]

Why are they doing this? The NIT is almost overkill as it is.

 

[DerHntr]

also maybe they are trying to top other insignificant competitions like women's ____ (fill in the blank)</p>

 

[DawgatAuburn]

[No message]

 

[RebelBruiser]

I do think that the CBI is overkill, but it's not nearly as much overkill as the 30+ bowl games in D-1 football.

In basketball, including the CBI now, you're only going to have 113 out of 341 D-1 teams playing in the post-season. That's slightly less than 1/3 of all D-1 teams. In football, over half of the 119 D-1 teams get to play in the post-season. Bowl games are much closer to the equivalent of the T-ball "give everyone a trophy" than the basketball tourneys.

They would have to expand the NCAA field to 128 and keep both the NIT and CBI still running in order to be the equivalent of the college bowl system.

 

[patdog]

or college bowl games? I've really never understood that. If you don't want to see it, just join the millions of other people who won't watch it. I won't watch either the NIT or this new tournament (except that I might possibly see a Mississippi game or an NIT Final Four game if I'm bored). But I don't give a rats *** that they're being played.

 

[Goat Holder]

in my opinion. More physical work, practice, mental preparation goes into football. I think if you win more than you lose, you should be rewarded. Not only for fans, but for the players.</p>

 

[Coach34]

in my opinion. More physical work, practice, mental preparation goes into football. I think if you win more than you lose, you should be rewarded. Not only for fans, but for the players.</p>

also, 1/3 of college basketball won 20 games last season. So, thats not really a big milestone anymore</p>

 

[RebelBruiser]

I agree that it's harder to have a winning season in football, especially in a major conference, but I still think there are about 8-10 bowl games that need to be eliminated. Neither Colorado nor Alabama deserved a bowl game based on anything they did last season. CU lost to a D-1AA team and Alabama lost to ULM. Both teams were mediocre at best. Neither team was a good team, which is typically what you are trying to reward.

Memphis, Florida Atlantic, USM, Nevada, UCLA, Maryland, Alabama, Colorado, Cal, and Ball State are all teams that really had no business being in bowl games this past fall. And you could make arguments for more.

 

[patdog]

Memphis, Florida Atlantic, USM, Nevada, UCLA, Maryland, Alabama, Colorado, Cal, and Ball State are all teams that really had no business being in bowl games this past fall. And you could make arguments for more.

Again I ask, why is this a problem? It gave the fans of those schools a good trip and an extra football game. And it didn't hurt anybody who didn't want to watch it.</p>

 

[RebelBruiser]

I didn't say it's a problem. I just said it devalues the bowl system. If you expanded the NCAA field to 128 teams, it wouldn't be a problem in that more teams would be interested, and you'd have more games to watch if you wanted to, but it would devalue the accomplishment of being an NCAA team. You'd probably get 9 or 10 SEC teams into a 128 team field, much like you have 8 or 9 teams in bowl games sometimes. That devalues the accomplishment, just as it would do in basketball if the field was expanded. Right now, if you aren't in the top half of your conference, you can pretty much kiss your NCAA chances goodbye. If you aren't in the top half of your conference in football, you still have a shot at a bowl game.

Hence, college football is much more like the "give everyone a trophy" scenario than the college basketball post-season.