The unofficial online home for fans of the UAB Blazers. Part of Collegiate Sports Nation (CSN).

(03-17-2014 02:26 PM)BlazeNBham Wrote:  The not in tournament(NIT) is for teams that got robbed of an at large bid. The can't be in(CBI) tournament is for teams that don't belong in the postseason. The call in tournament(CIT) is for teams that think everyone deserves a trophy for participation.

This all sounds like the "too many bowl games" argument that comes up every year. Lower level (and lower pay out) bowls and tournaments exist because the market seems to exist to support them. It is good old free enterprise marketing.

UAB should go to any bowl in football or tournament in Basketball that serves to help it in publicity or in preparing young players for the next season through its extended practices. IU apparently felt it needed neither and UAB may have agreed.

There is no publicity in the CBI or CIT. There is no national media that covers it. The NCAAcompletely overshadows all conversation. The only reason the NIt gets any publicity is because ESPN uses it as filler and counter programming.

The only thing these tournaments get you is a lighter wallet.

According to two studies published last year, every team that played in the CBI lost money, including teams that just played at home, because a percentage of the gate receipts are required to be paid to the visiting team to help them offset travel costs.

And, there you have it...

(03-20-2014 08:18 PM)Grammar-Nazi Wrote:  According to two studies published last year, every team that played in the CBI lost money, including teams that just played at home, because a percentage of the gate receipts are required to be paid to the visiting team to help them offset travel costs.

That still leaves the value of additional practices and additional games for a young team prepping for the next season. Besides, it is likely that schools also lose money on the lesser payout football bowls and long distance tournament games so payback must come from some other consideration than outright cash profit. It could be the rallying of fans who cheer even if it is just at the airport as the team comes and goes.

Also, the bigger the program, the bigger the retinue that the school seems to feel it has to pay for out of athletic funds. The big athletic programs seem to have their kind of "posses" too. another possibility is that the figures that come from the schools may be skewed by balancing all expenses against the tournament / bowl payout while not counting "contributions" they get from grateful donors so the AD doesn't have to give up as much to the school's administration. They may need the money for a new waterfall for the locker rooms.

Oh, look. A Bama reference.

In recent years VCU won the CBI and the next year they went to Final Four, Louisville womens team went from WBI to Sweet 16, and after their back to back trips to national title games Butler accepted a bid to one of these C tournaments. Last time I checked, we've never been to a national title game.

There is no correlation, only coincidence.

I'll ask my question a third time:

Does anyone know for sure if we were actually invited to one of these tournaments?

Nobody knows anything on here. We all make guesses and post with certainty

(03-20-2014 10:18 PM)Memphis Blazer Wrote:  There is no correlation, only coincidence.

So extra practices, post season experience, and possibly confidence building wins had nothing to do with success the following year.....Again I'm not a fan of these tournaments but I don't see a point in attacking their existence. There are times when these tournaments can provide a spring board to future success. They may cost money but as the saying goes you have to spend money to make money. If there was a possibility that paying for a couple wins might translate into more success the following season we would take it.

(03-20-2014 10:59 PM)stc Wrote:  

(03-20-2014 10:18 PM)Memphis Blazer Wrote:  There is no correlation, only coincidence.

So extra practices, post season experience, and possibly confidence building wins had nothing to do with success the following year.....Again I'm not a fan of these tournaments but I don't see a point in attacking their existence.

They're pay for play tournaments. That's like paying a hooker for sex. UAB is above playing in these types of tournaments.

(03-20-2014 11:30 PM)BamaScorpio69 Wrote:  

(03-20-2014 10:59 PM)stc Wrote:  

(03-20-2014 10:18 PM)Memphis Blazer Wrote:  There is no correlation, only coincidence.

So extra practices, post season experience, and possibly confidence building wins had nothing to do with success the following year.....Again I'm not a fan of these tournaments but I don't see a point in attacking their existence.

They're pay for play tournaments. That's like paying a hooker for sex. UAB is above playing in these types of tournaments.

Hookers can provide valuable experience for the real deal though.

(03-20-2014 11:44 PM)demiveeman Wrote:  

(03-20-2014 11:30 PM)BamaScorpio69 Wrote:  

(03-20-2014 10:59 PM)stc Wrote:  

(03-20-2014 10:18 PM)Memphis Blazer Wrote:  There is no correlation, only coincidence.

So extra practices, post season experience, and possibly confidence building wins had nothing to do with success the following year.....Again I'm not a fan of these tournaments but I don't see a point in attacking their existence.

They're pay for play tournaments. That's like paying a hooker for sex. UAB is above playing in these types of tournaments.

Hookers can provide valuable experience for the real deal though.

Yep. Extra practice and confidence building wins.

With the way the NCAA and the NIT is moving we better get used to these tournaments. I agree on the decision not to play in it this year but I am all for their existence. CBS Sports has already picked up two of the CBI quarterfinal games and have the best of three championship so they are starting to get some tv exposure.

Some good matchups coming up.

Quarterfinals
3/24/14 Penn State @ Siena Albany, N.Y. 7pm ET CBS Sports Network
3/24/14 Radford @ Old Dominion Norfolk, Va. 7pm ET
3/24/14 Texas A&M @ Illinois State Normal, Ill. 9pm ET CBS Sports Network
3/24/14 Princeton @ Fresno State

I would love to see ODU win it.

You really call those good matchups? I wouldn't watch any of those games

(03-21-2014 10:09 AM)ATTALLABLAZE Wrote:  With the way the NCAA and the NIT is moving we better get used to these tournaments. I agree on the decision not to play in it this year but I am all for their existence. CBS Sports has already picked up two of the CBI quarterfinal games and have the best of three championship so they are starting to get some tv exposure.

Some good matchups coming up.

Quarterfinals
3/24/14 Penn State @ Siena Albany, N.Y. 7pm ET CBS Sports Network
3/24/14 Radford @ Old Dominion Norfolk, Va. 7pm ET
3/24/14 Texas A&M @ Illinois State Normal, Ill. 9pm ET CBS Sports Network
3/24/14 Princeton @ Fresno State

I would love to see ODU win it.

The NCAA and NIT aren't moving any particular way. The NCAA Selection Committee has been very consistent with how it awards bids over the past decade, some people just don't care for the way they do it. Believe it or not, they don't care what conference you play in if you meet their requirements.

Our conference shifted, it isn't any more complicated then that. C-USA is going to have to get multiple teams in the top 50 or 60 in the RPI if we want multiple bids.

And which on of those games is appealing to you? That's a garbage tournament with garbage games in my opinion.

Actually I would watch all of them because I enjoy basketball.
I like ODU and hope they win because they represent C-USA. I think Illinois State will beat TAMU. Love watching SEC teams lose. Good entertainment.
The Princeton at Fresno game is very intriguing. Two contrasting styles of play.
Love the fact that big bad Penn State has to travel to Sienna. A place where we have had to play under Anderson in the NIT.

I would watch all four of them over any SEC game. That's how I roll.

I'll put it this way. When we played Coastal Carolina in the NIT people in other parts of the country thought it was two garbage teams in a garbage tournament.

Yep. There were a lot of "mid major" type teams In the tourney this year. SLU just made an incredible comeback in a great game last night. The bison of SDSU just beat Oklahoma. Harvard took down Cincy. It sucks that we got stuck in a sucky conference, but we have to do something to compensate for it if we wanna make it in. If you still see schedules like this past season's and more losses to sub-200 teams, we don't deserve to get in

Alot of those teams barely had winning records. It is a garbage tournament.

However, I still wish we had played in one this year. We could have started all returning players and played the seniors sparingly.