(03-17-2014 08:41 AM)Redwolves06 Wrote:  

(03-17-2014 12:20 AM)chiefsfan Wrote:  

(03-17-2014 12:18 AM)MissouriStateBears Wrote:  

(03-17-2014 12:02 AM)chiefsfan Wrote:  

(03-16-2014 11:57 PM)MissouriStateBears Wrote:  We took our CIT run into a MVC title. Its not a bad deal really.

One of the reasons that ASU wont play in those tournaments is the lack of exposure for the program...not to mention the financial cost for hosting a game makes it not worth it.

Differences in schools. We won't pay the million dollars for a coach, but we buy $30,000 post season basketball games.

I think Brady is around 450K...so yeah...we're not paying him that much so he can add CIT Champions to his resume.

Besides, our fans judge seasons as either NCAA, NIT, or bust. And truthfully, the NIT isn't a good thing either because that means you choked in the clutch when you had the NCAA shot.

You're my man but this is ridiculous...

The only way an SBC team is getting in the NIT is to have an incredible season and not make the NCAA's.

Considering our Women's coach is under fire right now for very similar reasons, despite winning the league and coach of the year. I think its a very reasonable thing to point out.

The NIT is a consolation prize...its not like you want to play there.

(03-17-2014 12:02 AM)chiefsfan Wrote:  

(03-16-2014 11:57 PM)MissouriStateBears Wrote:  We took our CIT run into a MVC title. Its not a bad deal really.

If you have the type players who see the tourney as a stepping stone, and you are prepared to deal with the lack of exposure.

One of the reasons that ASU wont play in those tournaments is the lack of exposure for the program...not to mention the financial cost for hosting a game makes it not worth it.

lack of exposure? really? not to be funny but ASU never gets exposure, why should this be any different?

(03-17-2014 05:15 PM)perimeterpost Wrote:  

(03-17-2014 12:02 AM)chiefsfan Wrote:  

(03-16-2014 11:57 PM)MissouriStateBears Wrote:  We took our CIT run into a MVC title. Its not a bad deal really.

If you have the type players who see the tourney as a stepping stone, and you are prepared to deal with the lack of exposure.

One of the reasons that ASU wont play in those tournaments is the lack of exposure for the program...not to mention the financial cost for hosting a game makes it not worth it.

lack of exposure? really? not to be funny but ASU never gets exposure, why should this be any different?

Why pay to play in a tournament whose games wont be on TV...wont be mentioned on Sports Center, and will barely get noticed in your local media?

It may not be any different that what basketball currently gets...but our administration strongly believes television exposure is how you build an athletic program. Our football program proves that.

(03-17-2014 05:28 PM)chiefsfan Wrote:  

(03-17-2014 05:15 PM)perimeterpost Wrote:  

(03-17-2014 12:02 AM)chiefsfan Wrote:  

(03-16-2014 11:57 PM)MissouriStateBears Wrote:  We took our CIT run into a MVC title. Its not a bad deal really.

If you have the type players who see the tourney as a stepping stone, and you are prepared to deal with the lack of exposure.

One of the reasons that ASU wont play in those tournaments is the lack of exposure for the program...not to mention the financial cost for hosting a game makes it not worth it.

lack of exposure? really? not to be funny but ASU never gets exposure, why should this be any different?

Why pay to play in a tournament whose games wont be on TV...wont be mentioned on Sports Center, and will barely get noticed in your local media?

It may not be any different that what basketball currently gets...but our administration strongly believes television exposure is how you build an athletic program. Our football program proves that.

some of the games are on TV, Ohio vs Cleveland State is on CBS Sports on Wednesday. The home team pays $30K, sell 3k tickets for $10/piece and you break even, sell more and you've got a profit. Good opportunity to reward seniors and give extra practice to players returning next year. Lots of benefits.

(03-17-2014 06:00 PM)perimeterpost Wrote:  

(03-17-2014 05:28 PM)chiefsfan Wrote:  

(03-17-2014 05:15 PM)perimeterpost Wrote:  

(03-17-2014 12:02 AM)chiefsfan Wrote:  

(03-16-2014 11:57 PM)MissouriStateBears Wrote:  We took our CIT run into a MVC title. Its not a bad deal really.

If you have the type players who see the tourney as a stepping stone, and you are prepared to deal with the lack of exposure.

One of the reasons that ASU wont play in those tournaments is the lack of exposure for the program...not to mention the financial cost for hosting a game makes it not worth it.

lack of exposure? really? not to be funny but ASU never gets exposure, why should this be any different?

Why pay to play in a tournament whose games wont be on TV...wont be mentioned on Sports Center, and will barely get noticed in your local media?

It may not be any different that what basketball currently gets...but our administration strongly believes television exposure is how you build an athletic program. Our football program proves that.

some of the games are on TV, Ohio vs Cleveland State is on CBS Sports on Wednesday. The home team pays $30K, sell 3k tickets for $10/piece and you break even, sell more and you've got a profit. Good opportunity to reward seniors and give extra practice to players returning next year. Lots of benefits.

Even if it were viable for us...our issue is three-fold. 1. There is no way we could convince 3K fans to come watch a CIT matchup. 2. Our coaching staff thinks recruiting is signing a whole bunch of JUCO guys...so its extremely rare for us to have young players. Next year's team will have three players who played more than 3 minutes per game returning, and we think one of those is leaving anyway. 3. The cost for preparing the arena is a lot more than 30K. We have to pay ushers, concession workers, parking attendants, security etc. We have to pay the bills to keep the arena open. Those things cost quite a bit.

That being said, maybe getting a game on CBSSN is not worth the trouble.

SBC goal should be three in the big dance, and a couple NIT. We have no history for this, but IMO it is absolutely doable. The doable of course means more money for more home games against good teams you can get a win against, instead of loses against teams Duke might lose to.

(03-17-2014 06:59 PM)CajunExpress Wrote:  SBC goal should be three in the big dance, and a couple NIT. We have no history for this, but IMO it is absolutely doable. The doable of course means more money for more home games against good teams you can get a win against, instead of loses against teams Duke might lose to.

Lol have we ever had more than 1 in each during any given year?

All I am saying is it is doable, other non p5 leagues have done it. Big East was a p6 until this year.

I do believe we had two in the NCAA a year or two, but not sure we also had an NIT. Our athletic directors need to pay attention to Cajun fan and RPI expert 'Gone Golfin' to see how to add value to your schedule. Value will pay a lot more than a trip to Michigan State, Duke, or others like that.

(03-17-2014 07:19 PM)Redwolves06 Wrote:  

(03-17-2014 06:59 PM)CajunExpress Wrote:  SBC goal should be three in the big dance, and a couple NIT. We have no history for this, but IMO it is absolutely doable. The doable of course means more money for more home games against good teams you can get a win against, instead of loses against teams Duke might lose to.

Lol have we ever had more than 1 in each during any given year?

We had two in the NCAA's just last year.

Saw the Lamers going to host a CBI game. Gotta believe WKU with 20-11 is more impressive than a 17-16 TooLAME team. Did the WKU guys not want this type game.

(03-17-2014 08:30 PM)CajunExpress Wrote:  Saw the Lamers going to host a CBI game. Gotta believe WKU with 20-11 is more impressive than a 17-16 TooLAME team. Did the WKU guys not want this type game.

If you are WKU, with decades of College Basketball History. Would you honestly want to hang a CBI Banner in your arena?

CBI or CIT are a joke.

NIT is pretty meaningless as well without at least a final four run. I'd argue that a sweet sixteen NCAA run is better than a NIT final four run and an elite eight NCAA run is better than a NIT championship.

Hey Redwolves06 and you other young whippersnappers! SBC has had multiple teams in both-MANY times.
4 NCAA Bids in 1986.2 Bids in79,80,81,83,87,90,93,94,08,13.
2 NIT Bids in 80,81,83,84,88,89,91,92,05.
Multiple Bids the same year in both-80,81,83.
Current team NCAA Bids:
WKU-23
Louisiana-10(incl 2014)
USA-8
ULM-7
UALR-4
GSU,TX ST-2
ARK ST,TROY,UTA-1

(03-17-2014 08:30 PM)CajunExpress Wrote:  Saw the Lamers going to host a CBI game. Gotta believe WKU with 20-11 is more impressive than a 17-16 TooLAME team. Did the WKU guys not want this type game.

No Western didn't want this. Coaches believe the time would be better spent on recruiting than a game no one cares about or wanted. It's only 17 days or so before the dead period and we are putting a fullcourt press on a couple recruits to go along with our fall signees. So which is more important a week to two weeks practice that really means nothing next year and playing a game(s) no one wants to see or hit the road recruiting?

(03-17-2014 08:50 PM)MTPiKapp Wrote:  CBI or CIT are a joke.

NIT is pretty meaningless as well without at least a final four run. I'd argue that a sweet sixteen NCAA run is better than a NIT final four run and an elite eight NCAA run is better than a NIT championship.

What are you talking about...

being in the 1st round (team 65-68) is better than a NIT championship.