CIT/CBI Bracketology Number 8 March 12th 2019

By: Ethan Hennessy

We are in the middle of conference tournament season. A handful of NCAA tournament bids have already been decided. My Loyola Greyhounds as usual like they have done over the past half decade plus were one of the first 20 or so teams in the country to bow out of contention for the NCAA tournament, My Crusaders also made an early exit in the Missouri Valley Conference Tournament losing to the other Loyola in the quarterfinals.

I am in my second season doing CIT/CBI bracketology for Happening Hoops. I do this because I genuinely enjoy following these tournaments, and believe they do not get a ton of coverage despite some good teams playing in them each year. In both 2017 and 2018 I was the first source to publicly break the majority of the fields for both tournaments.
In my final bracketology predictions for the 2018 fields I accurately predicted:
18/20 CIT teams and 9/16 CBI Teams.
The teams that get invited to these postseason tournaments are ones that failed to make the NCAA or NIT, and sometimes we do not know who is in and out of those tournaments until later in championship week. Also, teams must pay entry and hosting fees which deters some teams. Furthermore, in the CIT you are required a .500 record, and be a mid-major. Some coaches view these tournaments as good building blocks for their programs, and others do not, so that might lead one program to be more likely to turn down or accept a bid. Geography must also be factored into selection (you don’t want to have three teams on the west coast and all the rest on the east coast). Some programs have their AD or conference commissioner on the selection committee, so they are more likely to accept. Every year there are always the handful of teams you see in these tournaments it seems annually. If teams have long postseason droughts because this might make a team more likely to accept a bid to one of these tournaments. I also factor in which teams have accepted bids in the past years to one or both of the tournaments because that would indicate (assuming they meet the selection committee criteria) they are more likely to return.

I will not consider teams that are leading their league at the time of this because they would be heading to the NCAA or NIT tournament (however we all know standings change often). Lastly, any inside information I hear about programs expressing interest in participating will be factored into these. So with attempting to factor all of that information into this I will try to tell you who I think will be heading to the CIT and CBI this year.
Any information on teams being offered, accepting, or declining bids to either tournament can be sent to HappeningHoops@gmail.com or DM’ed to Happening Hoops on Twitter.

 

I am ranking teams by groups of who I believe is most likely to end up in a tournament to least likely. All 36 teams you see listed here are teams I am currently projecting in the fields today, however teams in the A groups I believe have the best chance of ending up in the tournaments, B groups have a decent change, and teams in the C group I would still expect to see in the fields if the season ended today, but I have the least amount of confidence in that. In previously bracketology posts teams were listed in alphabetical order of conferences.
A group – Assuming this team does not win their conference tournament it is safe to assume they would end up in the tournament they are projected in.
B group – I think there is a good chance they end up where they are projected, but it is by no means a guarantee.
C group – Teams in this group have a fair shot of ending up in the tournament they are listed in.

CIT (20 teams last season)

  • Charleston Southern (17-16 Big South) Officially announced they are in the CIT
  • Presbyterian (18-15 Big South)
  • Robert Morris (17-16 NEC) A
  • Abilene Christian (25-6 Southland) A
  • Fort Wayne (18-15 Summit) A
  • Austin Peay (22-11 OVC) A
  • NJIT (21-12 ASUN) A
  • UIC (16-16 Horizon) A
  • UMBC (20-12 AE) B
  • Seattle (18-13 WAC) B
  • UCSB (21-9 Big West) B
  • FIU (19-12 CUSA) B
  • UTSA (17-14 CUSA) B
  • Brown (19-11 Ivy) B
  • Hartford (18-14 AE) C
  • GCU (18-12 WAC) C
  • CMU (21-10 MAC) C
  • NC A&T (18-12 MEAC) C
  • Lamar (19-12 Southland) C
  • San Diego (21-14 WCC) C

 

CBI (16 teams last season)

  • Cal Baptist (16-14 WAC) A (Announced they will host a game in one of the two tournaments on Wednesday March 20th. They did not say which one, but I have them in the CBI for now). 
  • West Virginia (12-19 Big 12) A (Said they would host every game they could in the tournament)
  • Green Bay (17-16 Horizon)
  • Grambling State (16-15 SWAC) B
  • Stony Brook (24-8 America East) B
  • Longwood (15-17 Big South) B
  • Jacksonville State (24-9 OVC) B
  • IUPUI (16-16 Horizon) B
  • Southeastern Louisiana (16-15 Southland) B
  • UTRGV (18-15 WAC) B
  • DePaul (16-15 Big East) C
  • New Orleans (17-12 Southland) C
  • Duquesne (19-12 A10) C
  • Radford (22-11 Big South) C
  • Loyola Marymount (20-11 WCC) C
  • Texas Southern (19-12 SWAC) C

 

 

Just Missed the Cut (in no particular order):

  • Rutgers (14-16 Big Ten)
  • Delaware (17-16 CAA)
  • FAU (17-14 CUSA)
  • Canisius (15-17 MAAC)
  • Miami OH (15-17 MAC)
  • Air Force (13-17 MW)
  • Samford (17-16 SoCon)
  • Southern Utah (14-15 Big Sky)

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: