Is the NIT the new Bowl game?
Opt-outs galore
Is the NIT the new Bowl game? That is the question, but maybe not in real-time. It was likely seen as a Bowl Game long before this season, when several teams, mostly large schools, said, “No thanks.” There’s probably plenty of blame to go ’round, so let’s look at a few of the possibilities. However, let’s first explore where the NIT derives from to put things in perspective.
Search: NIT Tickets
Use code 12oz in Section 2/Payment for additional discounts!! We are a resale marketplace. Some ticket prices may be above face value. Use code 12oz in Section 2/Payment for additional discounts!!
Force their hand
The NCAA was originally against a post-season tournament. Sound familiar? Yes, eerily similar to football pre-CFP, the NCAA allowed Champions to be crowned via the Helms Athletic Foundation. The Helms Foundation’s Bill Schroeder named a national champion from 1901 to 1982, with his selections from 1901 to 1941 being named retroactively in 1943 and 1957. The Helms champion, for the years in which the NIT and NCAA post-season tournaments were played, reflected the winners of the 1938 NIT and 1939 NIT, as well as the winners for all years of the NCAA Tournament except for 1939, 1940, 1944, and 1954.
So what changed in 1937? James Naismith decided to create the NAIA Tournament. Naismith saw the importance of not only a tournament to define a winner but also the excitement and pageantry to accentuate the great sports he loved. The tournament was received so well, that the Metropolitan Basketball Writers Association rented old Madison Square Garden and thus began the NIT.
The first-ever NIT saw Temple beat Colorado, 60-36.
https://12ozsports.myspreadshop.com/
Never miss an opportunity
The NCAA being opportunist, decided that the 1938 NIT caught so much attention, that they would create their own tournament. Which is what we now know as March Madness. As the NCAA tournament expanded its field to include more teams, the reputation of the NIT suffered. In 1973, NBC moved televised coverage of the NCAA championship from Saturday afternoon to Monday evening. This provided the NCAA Tournament with prime-time television exposure the NIT could not match. Even more crucially, when the NCAA eliminated the one-team-per-conference rule in 1975, its requirement that teams accept its bids relegated the NIT to a collection of teams that did not make the NCAA grade.
It didn’t end there. The NCAA really flexed its muscle when it purchased the NIT in 2005 from the MIBA for $56.5 million to settle an antitrust lawsuit, which had gone to trial and was being argued until very shortly before the settlement was announced. The MIBA alleged that compelling teams to accept invitations to the NCAA tournament even if they preferred to play in the NIT was an illegal use of the NCAA’s powers.
In addition, it argued that the NCAA’s expansion of its tournament to 65 teams (68 since 2011) was designed specifically to bankrupt the NIT. The NCAA was faced with the very real possibility of being found in violation of federal antitrust law for the third time in its history. They chose to settle (the first two violations were related to restrictions on televising college football and capping assistant coach salaries). As part of the purchase of the NIT by the NCAA, the MIBA disbanded.
Methodical Takedown?
Since then, the NCAA has bolstered its own “main” tournament and has downgraded the NIT. Treating the event as a consolation prize for missing the big dance. This brings us to the modern-day dilemma of the NIT, it is not seen as a meaningful game or series of games for players, and now coaches.
NCAA Basketball Tickets
Tickets for everything NCAA Basketball, including March Madness. See your favorite college teams play.
History, portal, and money
As if the history of the tournament and the NCAA takeover wasn’t enough, now players consider their “salary” and coaches factor in their time to dedicate to the transfer portal. Why would a player making cash for playing, in hopes of a title, care about a consolation prize? It doesn’t earn them extra money like a Natty would. And much like football, where the average team has more than twelve bowl game opt-outs, many of whom were regular starters, players won’t risk injury for something meaningless.
On the coaching side, the transfer portal has become more important in a way than the actual recruiting of high school players. Especially when the NCAA insists that offering money to high school players is unacceptable, but current college players are fine.
Is there a fix?
There may be a few, actually. First, change NIL. Offer incentives to players and coaches to make, and play, in the postseason. Whether it’s the playoffs or tournament, or a bowl game or NIT. Money talks and this could be seen as an immediate remedy. Secondly, keep the transfer portal closed until the season is actually over. Seems like an easy fix. I am not sure why this is even a thing. This promotes tampering. There is no reason why players should be allowed in a transfer portal while games are still being played for the current season.
Be fair with the blame game
So if you want to blame Syracuse, St. John’s, Pitt, Washington, Oklahoma, Indiana, Memphis, and Ole Miss that is your prerogative. However, I urge you to also place blame on the NCAA. An organization that continues to make bad, and confusing, decisions throughout the years under the veil of student-athletes. They do not care about the “student” portion, they want to make money which requires athletes to play.
And stop listening to talking heads on ESPN saying this is bad for the game. It’s bad for ESPN, who owns the exclusive rights to broadcasting the NIT. That is 100% their motivation for not seeing it from the players, and coaches’ perspective. These guys and gals didn’t even consider the position of the players and coaches. Just blatantly said this was wrong.
ESPN on Twitter: “”Give your players and coaches a chance to keep coaching and playing.” Tom Crean did not hold back on teams declining invites to the NIT. pic.twitter.com/sBbUG9stxU / Twitter”
“Give your players and coaches a chance to keep coaching and playing.” Tom Crean did not hold back on teams declining invites to the NIT. pic.twitter.com/sBbUG9stxU
It’s wrong for ESPN, but not necessarily for those opting out. Change the system and perhaps the outcome will change with it.