2009.03.15
NO bid for VMI
VMI did not get a bid to the NIT -- no huge surprise there. But VMI is not in the College Basketball Invitational, either, but Richmond is. VMI is not even in the new CollegeInsider tourney, but Liberty, ODU and JMU are.
I wonder if VMI turned down a bid to the CBI or the College Insider tourney because it didn't want to pay a financial guarantee? Cincinnati and Vanderbilt are also done for the year. I am sure those 2 schools could have been in the CBI or Insider tourney if they wanted to; they may have turned down the chance too.
We will find out what happened with VMI and tell you in Tuesday's paper.
-- Mark Berman
RSS feed 
I heard Dick Vitale say that everyone says that if you don't get in to the NCAA, it's your fault for not playing a stronger schedule that would have gotten you in!! But he said that it's not easy playing a stronger schedule, because you can't good teams to play you! However, I feel that if you're willing to play them on the road, you may be able to. Longwood University is willing to play anyone, anywhere, it looks like, and that seems to improve their schedule. So, this is one thing that kept VMI from getting in with an at-large bid!
Comment by Nelson — March 16, 2009 @ 3:34 am
i hope they turned it down.i think the nit should expand to 64 teams or even 65 also.i have no respect for the cbi because last year cincy got in at 13-18 and this year st.john's and oregon state with losing records!!!!! the only way a team should get in with a losing record is if they win their conference tournament.chicago.st,seattle had good years many teams with winning records could have been invited.sure you want that name team but with a losing record? and as for dick vitale's comments.many and i hate the word mid major smaller schools can't get big name schools to play them because if they do they often win and make the big guys look bad so then nobody wants to play them and look bad so they get punished!!
Comment by ac — March 16, 2009 @ 8:08 am
by the way i meant i hoped they turned down the invite and that's why they didn't get in but i think schools who turn down invites are babies.all tournies are good.just be happy to get in and use it for next season!!
Comment by ac — March 16, 2009 @ 8:10 am
Neslon; VMI never expected an NCAA at-large bid, what with an RPI of 135-ish....and VMI knew they were close to an NIT bid. Also, VMI is committed to 18 conference games (Longwood: zero). Can't compare the two school's scheduling practices.
Comment by Kevin — March 16, 2009 @ 8:54 am
Isn't playing Kentucky in Rupp Arena...oh, and WINNING...what you mean by having a tougher schedule? It's one thing to go on the road and get your butt handed to you. It's another to go on the road and actually win.
Comment by Moe — March 16, 2009 @ 8:57 am
Yes your point is excellant! Beating Kentucky was impressive! VMI may have hoped that Kentucky would have had a better team this year, so that beating them would carry more weight!
But they must have needed to schedule even more non-conference games against good teams.
usatoday uses the Sagarin rankings, which is very close to what
the NCAA Tournament committee uses. usatoday.com has VMI ranked 152 out of 347 teams! But VMI's schedule is ranked just 303.
Virginia Tech's schedule is ranked #20, and even they didn't get in because of their #57 ranking! So making the NCAA tournament as an at-large team is very, very rough!!
VMI had to not only schedule much better out-of-conference, but they would have had to beaten other teams equal to or better than Kentucky! Kentucky is ranked just #60 this year.
http://www.usatoday.com/sports/sagarin/bkt0809.htm
Comment by Nelson — March 16, 2009 @ 9:57 am
I understand the mathmatics relative to the NCAA, but it still does not explain the other three tournaments. VMI won 24 games this year, and has led the nation in scoring for three consecuitive years. That should count for something. It makes no sense that lower ranked teams such as Liberty got bids, and VMI did not. If they were offered a bid but chose to decline for financial reasons, so be it. Athletics are not exactly the focus of VMI, so that may well be the case. If they were not even offered a bid however, that would be truely very disappointing.
Comment by Jack — March 16, 2009 @ 10:40 am
VMI led the nation in scoring- almost 94 pts. per game. I have to believe that these other tourneys (maybe not the NIT) were tripping over themselves to offer them a bid.
If so, good for the school for politely declining- these young men are working on much more important things than paying to play in some two-bit wannabe tournaments about which no one cares.
Comment by Fred — March 16, 2009 @ 9:45 pm