Bay Area Billiken Posted February 22, 2006 Share Posted February 22, 2006 I've held fire since I read this last Thursday night. But I need the opinions of my fellow SLU supporters. The NIT Committee, now composed of various former coaches such as Dean Smith, C.M. Newton, and Carroll Williams (Santa Clara), as well as the old NIT Director, announced that an NIT bid will be reserved for any conference champion not winning its conference tournament (or getting an NCAA at large bid). And the old rule that a team had to be at least .500 to get an NIT bid has been abolished. From our standpoint, both are bad. With SLU's RPI inching the wrong way at 96 despite this recent winning streak, we now have to watch a number of minor (not really even mid-major) conferences and hope their regular season conference champions win their post-season tournaments. Take the SWAC for an example. Southern U. leads that conference with an RPI of 151. That is a team that our Billikens would probably beat by at least 10-15 points. Yet, if Southern U. does not win its conference tournament, it still would get an automatic NIT bid. The other conferences that fall in this category include the America East, Atlantic Sun, Big Sky, Big South, Big West, Mid-Continent, Mid-Eastern, Northeast, and Southern, and the list could grow with conference tournament upsets. And right now, there are 4 schools with sub-.500 records which have RPI's better than SLU's: St. Joseph's (48), Providence (81), Northwestern (88), and DePaul (95). A few years ago, the NIT expanded from 32 to 40 teams. Now it looks like the NIT is reserving 8-10 spots for minor conference champions. And frankly, I don't see how a team that is sub-.500 deserves any post-season bid, irrespective of whether that team plays in a big conference. SLU's best chance for post-season play is to win the A-10 Tournament and take all decisions away from the men behind various closed doors. Alternatively, here's hoping SLU's Athletic Department has started or is about to start lobbying the NIT and making sure the NIT is aware of our fine, up and coming, young team. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Billiphan Posted February 22, 2006 Share Posted February 22, 2006 Not to be a dick but this is the NIT we're talking about. Who cares? I think we need to set our sights higher than hoping we don't get edged out of an NIT spot. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Billiken Rich Posted February 22, 2006 Share Posted February 22, 2006 You failed in your first stated goal. While aiming for the NCAA tourney, it's foolish to not try for any post season. Obviously you didn't attend out game against Iowa two years ago...... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NashvilleBilliken Posted February 22, 2006 Share Posted February 22, 2006 I've been thinking about this as well and i'm in the middle, I guess. I think it's a great idea to take the conference champion if they don't make it to the (ncaa) tourney. Chances are that the team who wins the regular season will also win the tourney in the low-major conferences. If they don't, they must have had a heck of a season it's good that they get to the postseason. I feel bad for those teams who have 20 wins but are in a crap conference and never get to play on the national scene. I think it's good for their school, the fans, and the city. Now, taking sub .500 teams is what i take issue with. What is the point of that rule? It's not like it's hard to find teams who have won more games than lost. I just see this turning into another way for ACC and Big East teams to get undeserved respect. If you can't stay above 500, you don't deserve post season play whether you're Kennessaw State or Michigan State. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bay Area Billiken Posted February 22, 2006 Author Share Posted February 22, 2006 Of course, I am looking at this through blue colored lenses, from SLU's perspective, which is my first and foremost concern. Maybe there should be a 20 win rule to let a minor conference champion in the NIT. Personally, I would not favor it, but I could understand it. But some of those minor conference champions are not going to have 20 wins. And they may well be taking NIT bids from someone else. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sheltiedave Posted February 22, 2006 Share Posted February 22, 2006 The first half of the policy is fine. Any conference champ deserves a slot in the post season. As for the second, the NIT makes its money by putting butts in the seats, pure and simple. In the Bonner years, we sometimes travelled to the opposing team's homecourt because they would guarantee XXX seats being sold. New Mexico and Minnesota come to mind. More recently, Notre Dame weaseled their way into a home game against us in Fort Wayne due to projected ticket sales. Come to think of it, the NIT is praying they can get schools with rabid followings like Notre Dame, SWMS, Bradley, and Saint Joes into their shindig. They also want a couple teams from the Big East, ACC, and other higher profile conferences, so they retain a cachet. If they take teams with losing records that generate more $$ for everyone, bully for them. As far as this reducing our chances to get an invite, none. It would be fun to see a MVC or ACC team visit us in St. Louis. Savvis would be close to a sellout for a MVC/Saint Louis game. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bay Area Billiken Posted February 22, 2006 Author Share Posted February 22, 2006 I'd be all for the resumption of the old Bradley v. SLU rivalry at Savvis Center in the NIT, ... but let's take our chances in that A-10 Tournament and win the conference's automatic NCAA bid. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cheeseman Posted February 22, 2006 Share Posted February 22, 2006 I had no problem with what you were saying up to your last statment Sheltie Dave - if you think the MVC fans will fill the Savvis for a game against us in the NIT then why don't they fill the arena when we play SIUC or SMS? Attendance won't be any better. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slu72 Posted February 22, 2006 Share Posted February 22, 2006 I don't think MVC would fill Savvis. My guess would be our usual 9,000 maybe a few more depending upon proximity of the MVC school. Now the ACC or Big East might pull some more in. Say Maryland or DePaul/Notre Dame would probably get us 13,000. People look at the NIT as late season exhibition games, I think. Agreed let's win the A-10 and become this year's cinderella. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billikenmetz Posted February 23, 2006 Share Posted February 23, 2006 Yeah, but remember the old AD Woolard taking it up the ass from Kevin White at Notre Dame? How they got a "neutral site" game in Ft. Wayne and the place was as green as my St. Patty's day beer? And then Mike Brey got on the intercom at the end of the game and thanked everyone for coming to the "NEUTRAL SITE GAME?!?!?!?!?" If SLU would have won and Soderberg grabbed the mic to thank the 100 or so SLU fans, ex-Notre Dame Ron Pawlus would have thrown his only completed pass and taken off Soderbergs head. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bay Area Billiken Posted February 23, 2006 Author Share Posted February 23, 2006 That was a fiasco. Wasn't that game supposed to be at Family Arena originally? I never quite understood from out here how it mysteriously was transferred to that "neutral site" in Ft. Wayne. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.