College Basketball to get new postseason tournament

[Young Drachma]

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2007/basketball/ncaa/wires/11/14/2060.ap.bkc.another.tournament.1st.ld.writethru.0637/

[MikeVic]

You don't say?

[Groundhog]

Do we need another pointless postseason tournament like the NIT?

[Young Drachma]

Sure, why not? Not all of us play at top colleges. It's not about naming a national champion. For some small schools that never get much post-season opportunity, it's a chance to shine.

[RainMaker]

I think it needs some kind of niche to be succesful. Perhaps it should only take small and mid-major conference schools? Would be a nice bonus for small schools that get overlooked and some nice publicity for schools that would otherwise not be seen by the public. I just hope this tournament doesn't turn into picking the big name schools for attendance and ratings. I could careless about seeing under .500 conference records playing postseason basketball.

[TargetPractice6]

Yes, we won! We're number 98!

[chesapeake]

I wonder what their business model is. Unless they plan on throwing a lot of money at teams to come play, I would expect the bigger name schools that didn't make the big dance will still go to the NIT because of its greater prestige and history. Is someone really going to watch Wichita State play the Akron Zips when the game doesn't mean anything?

[Young Drachma]

The games are played at the home schools for all but the final round.

The bigger schools will like the chance to play. The smaller schools would love the chance to keep playing. Fans will like to see their teams keep playing. And if the games are at home, it'll be fine.

If the Women's NIT can draw, I have no doubt that this can draw, provided they keep the tournament at home arenas.

They say the finals will be a best two out of three series. Which is an interesting twist

[Groundhog]

Sure, why not? Not all of us play at top colleges. It's not about naming a national champion. For some small schools that never get much post-season opportunity, it's a chance to shine.

How about the conference tourneys? I'm not neccessarily AGAINST having another postseason tourney... I guess I just struggle to see the point.

[Young Drachma]

How about the conference tourneys? I'm not neccessarily AGAINST having another postseason tourney... I guess I just struggle to see the point.

As a college athlete, it's nice to play against talent that you normally don't get to test yourself against. You never want the season to end and you surely like the idea of playing in the post-season when an aborted run in a tournament can leave you sitting at home wondering what might have been.

It doesn't matter if you're "the best" as much as you get the chance for maybe a compelling story or two or get to see teams that you don't get to check out that often.

I can see why people dislike the idea and that it "waters down" the post-season. But...if someone else is willing to pay for it and there are surely fans of those programs who will be down for a post-season play, why not?

There are over 300 schools that play Division 1 basketball. Less than a third play in the post-season, even with this newly added tourney.

I prefer this over say, the glut of pre-season tournaments to be honest.

[sooner333]

It sounds like their business model is to try to attract bigger named teams, get a TV contract. They have pretty much said there is no tournament selection committee and they will do everything themselves and that there is not necessarily a .500 record or better rule. All of that smells like running the thing like the NIT used to run...get TV ratings and people in the seats.

This will feature bigger named schools b/c the NIT gives auto bids to all regular season champs, which adds a bunch of small schools to that bracket.

[sterlingice]

Yeah, it looks a lot more like a competitor to the NIT than anything. Which is a shame because the NIT actually made some good changes once the NCAA took it over.

SI

[kingnebwsu]

If the new tourney takes more mid-majors, then huzzah for it. If it takes the best of the BCS schools who all barely go 8-8 or 7-9 in conference...then it can go to hell.

[chesapeake]

It sounds like their business model is to try to attract bigger named teams, get a TV contract. They have pretty much said there is no tournament selection committee and they will do everything themselves and that there is not necessarily a .500 record or better rule. All of that smells like running the thing like the NIT used to run...get TV ratings and people in the seats.

This will feature bigger named schools b/c the NIT gives auto bids to all regular season champs, which adds a bunch of small schools to that bracket.

I agree with this assessment -- this is pretty much the same model as the NIT has, save for the sub-.500 record bit. And that leads back to my original point: if Maryland, LSU, Purdue or Washington have their choice, I would expect they would choose the NIT over this tourney, meaning that the pickings for a third post-season affair are going to include mid-majors with just above .500 records but little national following or bigger schools whose records weren't good enough to get into the NIT (likely no better than a game above .500) that hve some draw but are having a down year.

If the NIT is rolling in cash as it is, than I guess there would be a market out there for this product. But I don't know that it is, so I question the viability of this new product.

[ScottVib]

The NIT dropped to 32 teams for this season and still must invite the regular season champion of any conference who doesn't get into the NCAA's so there just might be a place for this tournament.