Teams Declining to Play in the NIT/College Crown Tourneys

College Football has seen a small increase in teams declining Bowl Bids
Proportionally the number of College Basketball programs declining Major Tourney Bids (NIT and College Crown Bid) is similar on a percentage basis

Personally, I was looking forward to seeing Seton Hall and Indiana in the College Crown

Should teams be forced to accept any Post-Season bid?

I'd say yes under these circumstances
a) Tournaments are not pay-to-play
b) At least 8 scholarship players on the roster
c) Regular season head coach is still the head coach

For the Old Folks
UCLA, in the 0's, is the first program that i can remember declining an NIT Bid as it was "beneath them"

Is this compatible in the NIL/Free Agent Era?

Discuss

If it’s run by the NCAA yes (which in our case would be the NCAA, NIT, WBIT, and women’s NCAA championships).

If it’s an outside group hosting (Crown, all bowl games outside the college football playoffs) I don’t see how you can compel anyone to say yes to them.

GMUgemini said:

If it’s run by the NCAA yes (which in our case would be the NCAA, NIT, WBIT, and women’s NCAA championships).

If it’s an outside group hosting (Crown, all bowl games outside the college football playoffs) I don’t see how you can compel anyone to say yes to them.

Click to expand...

I think it is straightforward

I was a freshman at Penn when Penn went to the Final Four in 79
The Ivy League passed a rule where all Tourney revenues were split by all conference members.
After deduction for travel costs Penn got 2/9 of the funds and the other 7 schools each got 1/9 of the funds

Most College Football Conferences now follow similar rules

All that is needed is an addendum that says if you turn down an invite - for NON-LEGITIMATE reasons - you still owe the other Conference Members the funds they would have received if the declining team had gone