I just looked at the 32 team CIT tourney and was a little surprised to not see Western Kentucky or Arkansas St. among the teams.

When you add all the postseason tourneys you get 132 teams. The Sun Belt needs to have more than 2 teams among them.

Sun Belt finished as #19 conference headed into the post season tournaments. 19 of 33 is not horrible but next year hopefully it will move up some.

(03-16-2014 09:12 PM)GaSoEagle Wrote:  I just looked at the 32 team CIT tourney and was a little surprised to not see Western Kentucky or Arkansas St. among the teams.

When you add all the postseason tourneys you get 132 teams. The Sun Belt needs to have more than 2 teams among them.

Sun Belt finished as #19 conference headed into the post season tournaments. 19 of 33 is not horrible but next year hopefully it will move up some.

You think Ga Southern will help in helping the SBC move up in basketball?

(03-16-2014 09:12 PM)GaSoEagle Wrote:  I just looked at the 32 team CIT tourney and was a little surprised to not see Western Kentucky or Arkansas St. among the teams.

When you add all the postseason tourneys you get 132 teams. The Sun Belt needs to have more than 2 teams among them.

Sun Belt finished as #19 conference headed into the post season tournaments. 19 of 33 is not horrible but next year hopefully it will move up some.

WKU turns down any tourney outside of the NIT or NCAA

The CIT is a pay to play, so it actually costs school money to be a part of it and isn't a recognizable tourny. It's not surprising they aren't there, I'd guess atleast one of the 2 turned down a bid.

I hope we will.

All teams need to do better in non-conference next year. Once the conference season starts the RPI does not change dramatically.

(03-16-2014 09:12 PM)GaSoEagle Wrote:  I just looked at the 32 team CIT tourney and was a little surprised to not see Western Kentucky or Arkansas St. among the teams.

When you add all the postseason tourneys you get 132 teams. The Sun Belt needs to have more than 2 teams among them.

Sun Belt finished as #19 conference headed into the post season tournaments. 19 of 33 is not horrible but next year hopefully it will move up some.

Arkansas State has turned down postseason bids from the CIT or CBI in the past. Its not usually worth the effort to play,

What is CBI? How many teams are in that?

(03-16-2014 09:23 PM)GaSoEagle Wrote:  What is CBI? How many teams are in that?

College Basketball Invitational. Its a 16 team tourney, but it doesn't have rules requiring an over .500 record. Thus, its able to take teams from major conferences. Oregon won it a few years ago. Texas A&M is in it this year. Its also the only tournament that had a TV deal at one point.

If you're looking at the list, its the 3rd most prestigious simply because a far fewer amount of mid majors get in it, while the CIT is designed specifically for mid major conferences.

(03-16-2014 09:17 PM)GaSoEagle Wrote:  I hope we will.

All teams need to do better in non-conference next year. Once the conference season starts the RPI does not change dramatically.

Does ferguson come back for you guys next year.

(03-16-2014 09:12 PM)GaSoEagle Wrote:  I just looked at the 32 team CIT tourney and was a little surprised to not see Western Kentucky or Arkansas St. among the teams.

When you add all the postseason tourneys you get 132 teams. The Sun Belt needs to have more than 2 teams among them.

Sun Belt finished as #19 conference headed into the post season tournaments. 19 of 33 is not horrible but next year hopefully it will move up some.

Next year the SBC loses WKU (RPI 125) and adds in Appy State (RPI 335) and GA Southern (RPI 303). Not very likely the conference RPI will raise any next year.

On a side note, CUSA has 7 teams in the post season (1-NCAA, 2-NIT, 3-CBI, 1-CIT). It would have been 8, but MTSU declined the CBI and CIT

I think this was year 1 of a 3 year rebuild for us.

If that is the timeline, don't expect us to help make the conference much better next year.

The year after though... OHHHH YEAH!

CBI and CIT are a joke unless you are a low,low level team or start mostly freshmen and sophs.The fact that ARK ST., WKU,and MT turned them down should give you a clue.

(03-16-2014 09:57 PM)topper1296 Wrote:  

(03-16-2014 09:12 PM)GaSoEagle Wrote:  I just looked at the 32 team CIT tourney and was a little surprised to not see Western Kentucky or Arkansas St. among the teams.

When you add all the postseason tourneys you get 132 teams. The Sun Belt needs to have more than 2 teams among them.

Sun Belt finished as #19 conference headed into the post season tournaments. 19 of 33 is not horrible but next year hopefully it will move up some.

Next year the SBC loses WKU (RPI 125) and adds in Appy State (RPI 335) and GA Southern (RPI 303). Not very likely the conference RPI will raise any next year.

On a side note, CUSA has 7 teams in the post season (1-NCAA, 2-NIT, 3-CBI, 1-CIT). It would have been 8, but MTSU declined the CBI and CIT

sounds like a basketball powerhouse to me

(03-16-2014 10:56 PM)Godzilla Wrote:  

(03-16-2014 09:57 PM)topper1296 Wrote:  

(03-16-2014 09:12 PM)GaSoEagle Wrote:  I just looked at the 32 team CIT tourney and was a little surprised to not see Western Kentucky or Arkansas St. among the teams.

When you add all the postseason tourneys you get 132 teams. The Sun Belt needs to have more than 2 teams among them.

Sun Belt finished as #19 conference headed into the post season tournaments. 19 of 33 is not horrible but next year hopefully it will move up some.

Next year the SBC loses WKU (RPI 125) and adds in Appy State (RPI 335) and GA Southern (RPI 303). Not very likely the conference RPI will raise any next year.

On a side note, CUSA has 7 teams in the post season (1-NCAA, 2-NIT, 3-CBI, 1-CIT). It would have been 8, but MTSU declined the CBI and CIT

sounds like a basketball powerhouse to me

We have argued about the CBI and CIT on the UALR board for a number of years. Several times we have had pretty good seasons and didn't go. Never heard for sure that we turned down bids, but pretty sure we did. I haven't looked at the teams in those tournaments this year, but in the past I have seen schools with a heck of a lot more basketball tradition and history than UALR accept bids. I've seen several teams use a run in one of those tourney's as a stepping stone to an NIT bid or NCAA bid the following season. I don't think a program like ours, or most in the Sun Belt, have the gravitas to turn down any postseason bid. I wouldn't want to go, as a .500 team, but if we were 20-12 (or something like that) I think it would be somewhat of a reward for our players and fans for a good season. Based on their seeding, it appears pretty obvious that GaSt wouldn't have even gotten an at-large NIT bid. Having our teams in postseason tournaments, can never be a bad thing, in my opinion.

We took our CIT run into a MVC title. Its not a bad deal really.

(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.

The road to mediocrity involves stepping into the CBI-CIT.There are exceptions to consider in only a few cases IMHO.

(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.

(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.

(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...