UC in the postseason?
OK, just for the sake of argument let's assume that UC will not win the Big East Tournament and go to the NCAA Tournament. What then? The good news is that in addition to the 32-team NIT, there's the new 16-team College Basketball Invitational, which intends to compete with the NIT for teams once the NCAA names its 65-team field.
UC does not have to have a winning record to play in the NIT, but it's unlikely the Bearcats would be invited without one, according to the NIT's Chris Fallon.
"There is nothing in our selection process that requires a winning record," Fallon wrote in an e-mail. "However, with the automatic qualifiers handed out to regular-season conference champions not invited to the NCAA Tournament, it does not seem likely that a team with a losing record would be invited."
Mick Cronin is a proponent of the new tournament and said UC has already been contacted by it.
"It's about time we got as smart as college football," Cronin said. "Our coaches need to support it because it’s more post-season for more teams. Just like they’ve continued to add bowl games over the last 20 years in football we need to continue to add post-season opportunities for our teams like there continues to be another bowl game every other day. We'd be a candidate for both of those tournaments."
posted by bill koch at 11:07 AM
30 Comments:
at 11:38 AM 
Anonymous said...
-
-
at 11:39 AM 
Anonymous said...
-
-
at 11:44 AM 
Anonymous said...
-
-
at 12:00 PM 
RickNMd said...
-
-
at 12:23 PM 
Anonymous said...
-
-
at 12:24 PM 
Anonymous said...
-
-
at 12:27 PM 
Anonymous said...
-
-
at 12:35 PM 
Dave in Omaha said...
-
-
at 12:36 PM 
Anonymous said...
-
-
at 1:37 PM 
Monclova Steve said...
-
-
at 2:36 PM 
Anonymous said...
-
-
at 2:43 PM 
Anonymous said...
-
-
at 2:54 PM 
Anonymous said...
-
-
at 3:51 PM 
Anonymous said...
-
-
at 4:34 PM 
Anonymous said...
-
-
at 4:54 PM 
Bcbdub said...
-
-
at 5:02 PM 
Cheviot Sports Authority said...
-
-
at 5:08 PM 
Anonymous said...
-
-
at 5:09 PM 
Anonymous said...
-
-
at 5:15 PM 
Anonymous said...
-
-
at 6:38 PM 
Monclova Steve said...
-
-
at 10:32 PM 
Unknown said...
-
-
at 11:42 PM 
Anonymous said...
-
-
at 12:42 AM 
Cheviot Sports Authority said...
-
-
at 10:01 AM 
Anonymous said...
-
-
at 10:08 AM 
Unknown said...
-
-
at 10:41 AM 
Anonymous said...
-
-
at 11:39 AM 
Anonymous said...
-
-
at 2:08 PM 
Anonymous said...
-
-
at 2:08 PM 
Anonymous said...
-
-
Post a Comment*With respect to MC and adding more post season BB tourney games as FB with has done - FB has bowl games nobody watches nor cares about.
Is it about money for FB bowl games - I would guess it is since there isn't much interest in many of the minor bowls.
There's some interest mostly by fans of teams in NIT but otherwise not much. I love college BB but another post season tourney beyond NCAA and NIT is over saturation, and would seem to degrade the product more than enhance it - and gotta believe it won't make a lot of $ for school's involved.
It will be interesting to see how the NIT field compares to this new "CBI" tournament. Some of the conference champions that get an automatic bid will not be very good teams. I'm not sure how many NIT "at-large" bids that will leave. I wonder if it might well turn out to have a better field. Of course, this could also be a positive for a coach's job security (I'm NOT referring to Mick), providing one more place to play in the post-season. Interesting.
Whats the NCAA BB field now, 65 teams? Allow all 120+ D1 BB teams to compete in common NCAA season end tourney and you add a single weekend of games to complete the tourney. Seems simple and more money for all teams.
Hey, what did I miss about cleaning up the blog? Was there a big spanking?
We don't need another postseason basketball tournament. The NIT is already too big and attendance for those early round games are pretty low.
There is a market for a postseason tourney that rewards the handful of teams that miss the Big Dance, but to have two competing NITs?
The schools already play about 30 games. Either you make the Big Dance or you don't. And the next time some school administrator wants to make noise about students and academics, look into the palm and see the money grease.
Doesn't the NCAA run the NIT? I wonder what they think of this CBI thingy, and how it will dilute an already weak little sister tournament. If offered both, which would UC take? The idea to get tournament experience for our freshmen and some sort of post season reward for our seniors would be an upside. Beats sitting at home.
I like the CBI tournament and the NIT. I would rather see UC play in the NCAA tournament every year, but the post season tournaments have their upside. For young teams and coaches early on in their tenure it allows them to gain experience in a tournament enivorment with competive teams. The school recieves some exposure and as a fan more basketball is better than less basketball. The UC team coached by Andy Kennedy was not a good fit for the NIT, veteran team, school making a coaching change. This years UC team would be. Its a young team the would gain a lot by playing in the big east tournament and the NIT/CBI, plus it shows progress. For UC to reach the post season the Cats have to finish 15-15 (10-8) then win one game in the big east tournament to feel good about extending thier season. I am not sure 15-16, would get the job done.
well there are over 320 D1 basketball teams so one big tournament probably wont work. and i never understand the argument that there are too many bowl games. if you dont like them dont watch. but i havent seen teams turn down invitations. teams are trying to convince bowls to take them, not bowls trying to convince teams to come play. same way with basketball. until the non ncaa post season tournaments cant get enough teams to play I say keep them coming. If you dont like it, then dont watch but let schools and teams play if they want to and those who want to watch will.
And about no one watching lower level bowl games, many of them set tv ratings records this year, including the pizza bowl.
If it were me giving invites, I'd say you have to have better than a .500 record in conference AND overall to qualify for any post-season tourney.
Otherwise, just invite everyone...
While I'm not a big proponent of the amount of bowl games in football, and I'm not a huge fan of the NIT or this new CBI...for UC to play in ANY postseason tournament would be greatly beneficial to their growth. Not only would they be allowed to practice more, but it would allow them to perhaps taste some postseason success than could only bode well for the future of the program.
I don't care what tourney they play in. Of course, I'd like them to play in the Big Dance, but that's likely a long shot. I just want them to keep playing and getting better.
According to the Gazelle Group, who runs the CBI, here is what last year's matchups would have been.
Washington(19-13)/Hawaii (18-13)
Houston (18-15)/Santa Clara(20-10
LSU (17-15)/Nebraska (17-14)
Oklahoma (16-15)/Kent St. (21-11)
Missouri (18-12)/St. Louis (20-13)
Iowa (17-14)/N. Iowa (18-13)
UConn (17-14)/St. Joe's (18-13)
Dayton (19-12)/Akron (26-7)
These are teams that were not invited to the NCAA or NIT. On more note -- the championship is best 2 out of 3!
If they win their last 3 at home and win one in the BE tournament (probably against either Syracuse or Villanova) they will be guaranteed a .500 record and probably a spot in the NIT. A post season tournament would be a great reward for a team that has played well in conference and has looked like a different team with Warren at point guard.
Unless they are the walking wounded, then I'd want my team playing as many games as we could get in. More games equals more experience at a higher level.
It would be too simple to have all Div I teams in the tournament with the top 64 or so having byes for the first 2 rounds. It would take about 2-3 more rounds. Have those first 2 rounds at the home court of the higher ranked team. A percentage of the gate would go to the NCAA.
I would hope if UC doesn't even make the NIT they would opt not to play in the new one.What's the point?I'd be totally uninterested myself.Whatever happened to earning something legit?
I can remember when the "big dance" was 16 teams. should we go back to that or should stick in the mud right here?
There's only one thing about the Big Dance that detracts more than the number of teams. That's the fact the the best 64 (I know it's 65) do not all make the tournament. The automatic berth situation is out of hand. Just win a rinky dink sub mid-major tournament and you are automatically in and displacing a quality team. As Al McQuire once said, "Anybody can eat 26 cupcakes."
Regardless of your personal feelings about the spin-off postseason tournaments (good/bad for the perception of NCAA basketball), you have to agree it's a good thing for a young team like UC:
1. More $$
2. More practice
3. Tournament experience
4. TV time
It's really a no-brainer.
I think in addition to a 65 team NCAA tournament, a 32 team NIT and a 16 team CBI there should be a 64 team Loser's Invitational Tournament (LIT).
Sixty-four teams, all with losing records should be invited to determine just who is the best of the worst teams in college basketball.
ESPN2 Bowl Rating Highlights:
The Papajohns.com Bowl drew 2.2 million households, the most-viewed bowl game on ESPN2 this season and the second highest-rated bowl game on ESPN2, behind only the 2002 GMAC Bowl, which attracted 2.3 million households.
ESPN2 Bowl Rating Highlights:
The Papajohns.com Bowl drew 2.2 million households, the most-viewed bowl game on ESPN2 this season and the second highest-rated bowl game on ESPN2, behind only the 2002 GMAC Bowl, which attracted 2.3 million households.
The NIT makes money by choosing schools that draw well, 7000+ are are good TV markets. If UC post a record of 10-8 or 11-7 in the Big East, at a minimum, they will be playing in the NIT.
CSA,
Thanks for the chuckle!
MSteve & CSA,
I agree about LIT.
It would be good to know the best of the worst, but I'd be interested in which team truly deserves #341, the worst in the nation, currently occupied by 0-27 New Jersey Tech.
The loser's bracket would play loser against loser, until finally the 2 biggest losers faced off.
The shame of being these teams would keep excitement high, and would ensure that the teams would not try to throw the game.
The Loser Champ would then get to have their entire team appear in the opening rounds of American Idol.
There is a reason you are not invited to the Big Dance and or NIT its because you don't deserve it. Plain and simple.
Yes, I hadn't really developed an outline for how this LIT works. Could very well be on to something here. The losing team advances and the winner is out. Loser of the championship game then would be the winner of the tournament. As a prize for winning (actually losing) their basketball program would be eliminated and they would still have to appear on American Idol. Do you follow that?
Here is what I don't get... UC apparently has no shot at the big dance, yet local media still has UK in the mix. I don't get that. UK had the really bad losses early like UC, which in part can be attributed to injury (like UC), But when you look at the conferences... The SEC is down this year and the Big East is so deep. UC has a good list of quality wins and UK has 2. I think if UC could add a win at Georgetown to their list and finish around 19-14, I think they would have a pretty good resume given their strength of schedule. I am of course biased, but its fun to think about. I just think that we hear about UK at 14-10 making this push to sneak in, and UC at 12-12 praying for the NIT. I think alot of that is the fact that UK was pre-season top 25 and UC was slated to be terrible. I think more teams would rather go play UK right now than come to Cincinnati.
CSA & MSteve,
I like it, CSA. They have their bball program eliminated and they still have to appear in the 1st round of American Idol.
The possibilities for improving the tournament are endless and we continue the LIT over the years. We will eventually get rid of those conferences who have no business sending a rep to the NCAA and cutting out infinitely more deserving teams.
Can you imagine? No more will the Smokey Holler Grits Conference have an automatic bid for their 320th ranked, Harland County HoundDogs basketball team.
The world will grieve their demise, no doubt, but we'll also no longer see a deserving SEC school, whose 3rd string could have demolished the HoundDogs with their eyes closed, locked out of the NCAA.
You might also want to put your brain to work designing an "AIT" (Average Invitational Tournament) for all those teams out there that exist in a state of perpetual basketball limbo.
Don't you think just making them watch the American Idol finale would be punishment...err reward enough for winning?
Is there any way that UC can make the NCAA this year? I would have said absolutely not, until I read the article in the Enquirer the other day - I think it ran in a Louisville paper - that still implied that UK had a decent chance. And this was AFTER the VANDY blowout. The writer might have been playing to the UK fan base, but still...if UK has a chance, then why not UC?
Apparently, ESPN and Jay Bilas agree. Take a look at ESPN's "bubble watch". The text about UC does not seem to be of recent vintage, and is not accurate (it mentions a rematch with Syracuse), but apparently UC still has a chance. Win all three home games. Steal one of the three away games. Win first 2 in Big East tournamnt.
That leaves UC at 11-7 in Big East play, at 18-15 overall, with 6 signature wins (if NOVA is still considered a signature win). The SOS will be among the toughest in the country, possibly including #1 (if Memphis wins out).
Let's look at the last Big East team in, each of the last 7 seasons. Ave. W-L in conference is 9-7. Ave. overall record is 21-10. Ave. RPI is 26, but a 42 got in.
Everyone is saying the field is very weak this year. It(UC making the NCAA) seems improbable, yet ESPN and Bilas say that it is indeed a possibility.
To me, it still seems like a huge long-shot, and that even assumes that UC posts the record that I have assumed here. I would be quite content with an NIT bid.
This is a joke, right? An early April Fool's Day prank?
UC won't make the NIT let alone the NCAA tourney. UK has a much better shot to make the NCAA as an at-large team.
After today's beat-down at G'town, this blog post is now completely irrelevant.
Maybe next year, Cats.
* Our online blogs currently are hosted and operated by a third party, namely, Blogger.com. You are now leaving the Cincinnati.Com website and will be linked to Blogger.com's registration page. The Blogger.com site and its associated services are not controlled by Cincinnati.Com and different terms of use and privacy policy will apply to your use of the Blogger.com site and services.
By proceeding and/or registering with Blogger.com you agree and understand that Cincinnati.Com is not responsible for the Blogger.com site you are about to access or for any service you may use while on the Blogger.com site.
<< Home