(03-15-2015 05:21 AM)emu steve Wrote:  here is a good source for brackets (CBI/CIT):

http://www.nycbuckets.com/cbicit-tracking/

Great link, thanks!

As for your second post, I would agree if your assumption is correct. However, I am getting the impression that pay to play is for both home and away teams.

Regardless, on some levels it does differentiate good mid majors from bad mid majors. Which will help with recruiting. Considering how expensive running a basketball program is anyways, this is worth the investment. EMU won't steal a recruit from Michigan State by claiming to have played in the CBI/CIT. But it is fair to say, they can use or as a selling point for a mid major level recruit over a team that was not invited.

Plus it rewards fans and players with extra games against decent opponents albeit other mid-majors. This is not the achievement of making the NCAA or NIT. But to dismiss it altogether is shortsighted, in my opinion.

(03-15-2015 11:04 AM)rayEMU Wrote:  

(03-15-2015 05:21 AM)emu steve Wrote:  here is a good source for brackets (CBI/CIT):

http://www.nycbuckets.com/cbicit-tracking/

Great link, thanks!

As for your second post, I would agree if your assumption is correct. However, I am getting the impression that pay to play is for both home and away teams.

Regardless, on some levels it does differentiate good mid majors from bad mid majors. Which will help with recruiting. Considering how expensive running a basketball program is anyways, this is worth the investment. EMU won't steal a recruit from Michigan State by claiming to have played in the CBI/CIT. But it is fair to say, they can use or as a selling point for a mid major level recruit over a team that was not invited.

Plus it rewards fans and players with extra games against decent opponents albeit other mid-majors. This is not the achievement of making the NCAA or NIT. But to dismiss it altogether is shortsighted, in my opinion.

the only people that show up for these games are locals and families. The university as a whole get nothing worth the cost.

(03-13-2015 10:22 PM)rayEMU Wrote:  

(03-13-2015 07:26 AM)emu79 Wrote:  Ah the key is two consecutive 20 season wins and post season going to translate into better recruiting results ie change the perception of EMU for potential recruits especially instate?

What is your final verdict about last years recruiting class? I think it was good with a couple Freshman guards with bright futures (Bond, Alvano), a couple JUCO(ish) players who probably could have been better utilized (Nazionne, Samuels), and a Mystery Freshman (Nobles).

Not a MAC version of the Fab Five, but pretty reasonable.

Well Ray, Edwards is a long shot, I like the JUCO SF already mentioned but there's a lot of competition. He would a perfect fit to fill Ward's spot, but I would also be happy with Cochrane out of Ann Arbor Pioneer and maybe as a long shot Wallace out of County Day. We need more scoring threats kinda like what Combs gave us off the bench instant offense. I'd be happy with a high scoring big guard/wing again Cochrane fits that nicely but we have offers out to Clyburn and Grayer or Kennedy out of Muskegon if his grades are good. That leaves a center/power forward. I like to see us steal a prep school player or JUCO at that spot but the 5th year graduate from Detroit might also fit in. Actually I'm hoping EMU Steve is right and we sweep some of the top uncommitted Michigan H.S. seniors. Love Lacy James but it looks like he isn't even on our radar screen.

In terms of next year I'll state that we all know Raven Lee is the key returnee, we have Nazione who wins my Mr Hustle award for his play next year, Price needs to up his game, Alvano and Bond will continue to grow but how much is the key, we have some nice bench players returning, right now in my opinion Lee is the only consistent game in and game out scoring threat. Stone is a nice talent but he'll have growing pains but long term I really like him. What will Nobles bring to the table?

(03-15-2015 12:07 PM)emussuperfan Wrote:  

(03-15-2015 11:04 AM)rayEMU Wrote:  

(03-15-2015 05:21 AM)emu steve Wrote:  here is a good source for brackets (CBI/CIT):

http://www.nycbuckets.com/cbicit-tracking/

Great link, thanks!

As for your second post, I would agree if your assumption is correct. However, I am getting the impression that pay to play is for both home and away teams.

Regardless, on some levels it does differentiate good mid majors from bad mid majors. Which will help with recruiting. Considering how expensive running a basketball program is anyways, this is worth the investment. EMU won't steal a recruit from Michigan State by claiming to have played in the CBI/CIT. But it is fair to say, they can use or as a selling point for a mid major level recruit over a team that was not invited.

Plus it rewards fans and players with extra games against decent opponents albeit other mid-majors. This is not the achievement of making the NCAA or NIT. But to dismiss it altogether is shortsighted, in my opinion.

the only people that show up for these games are locals and families. The university as a whole get nothing worth the cost.

Those are the only people who show up to our regular season games so what's your point?

CBI isn't about:

1). Recruiting. No effect.

2). National reputation. No effect.

3). Financial windfall or hit. No (real) effect (either way).

4). Building the fan base. No effect.

It is basically about playing one or more additional games with the chance to play for a 16 team tourney. Win two games and advance to the semis. Then it becomes fun for the players - the chance to win a tourney.

1. Okay I think it can only help not hurt recruiting.
2. Agreed. I felt last year's team was worthy of a NIT bid but the powers that be didn't see that way. I'm more concerned about our instate reputation.
3. Agreed, but we all realize that Murphy gets what a $40,000 bonus?
4. To be honest what fanbase? Attendance at home football and basketball games continues to be a challenge. People keep saying if we win people will come okay the men's team had two 20 game winning seasons and we still are attendance challenged and the women's team finished an inspirational season which I hope will see increased interest and attendance next year.

(03-15-2015 01:43 PM)emu79 Wrote:  1. Okay I think it can only help not hurt recruiting.
2. Agreed. I felt last year's team was worthy of a NIT bid but the powers that be didn't see that way. I'm more concerned about our instate reputation.
3. Agreed, but we all realize that Murphy gets what a $40,000 bonus?
4. To be honest what fanbase? Attendance at home football and basketball games continues to be a challenge. People keep saying if we win people will come okay the men's team had two 20 game winning seasons and we still are attendance challenged and the women's team finished an inspirational season which I hope will see increased interest and attendance next year.

The reason they don't is because they're not stupid, no one i there right mind ( im called crazy carl) would pay to watch d1 team whipe the floor with naia four times in a season even most of the d1 teams were pour teams at best. that is why even with 25 wins this team would have only gotten a 3rd rate envite to 3rd rate tournament. The competition we faced this year was abysmal.

(03-15-2015 01:51 PM)emussuperfan Wrote:  

(03-15-2015 01:43 PM)emu79 Wrote:  1. Okay I think it can only help not hurt recruiting.
2. Agreed. I felt last year's team was worthy of a NIT bid but the powers that be didn't see that way. I'm more concerned about our instate reputation.
3. Agreed, but we all realize that Murphy gets what a $40,000 bonus?
4. To be honest what fanbase? Attendance at home football and basketball games continues to be a challenge. People keep saying if we win people will come okay the men's team had two 20 game winning seasons and we still are attendance challenged and the women's team finished an inspirational season which I hope will see increased interest and attendance next year.

The reason they don't is because they're not stupid, no one i there right mind ( im called crazy carl) would pay to watch d1 team whipe the floor with naia four times in a season even most of the d1 teams were pour teams at best.

The OOC schedule is an issue, but NO real fan could doubt that the NINE MAC games were the real deal.

EMU offered a MAC schedule (only) package (with the option to buy UofM or MSU also). Ten games. Roughly 100 bucks.

The OOC schedule was weak, the MAC schedule didn't exactly excite. We are in a down cycle of MAC basketball where there are no stars that play in the conference anymore and there is great parity amongst the teams. A few decent teams (CMU, Buffalo, Toledo, Kent) etc. and a bunch of .500 type teams, with a few horrendous teams--Ball State!

That said, where are the students? They need to be the attendance foundation and then if you win--the locals and alumni make trips to bolster the crowds. It really begins and ends with the student body, they need to show up. It beats studying for a couple hours on a Tuesday or Wednesday and who studies on Saturday?

Can't use U of M as an excuse, they sucked and we beat them--WITH Caris LeVert.

Dear emu79,
In defense of the attendance issue about winning, superfan has point about who some of the home contests were against, but I think more importantly, Eastern flubbed the ball by losing the first two games of MAC competition, and at one point were 1-5 in the league. So who wants to come to games when the MAC season was essentially over. What's to get excited about?

(03-15-2015 02:22 PM)Ken Barna Wrote:  Dear emu79,
In defense of the attendance issue about winning, superfan has point about who some of the home contests were against, but I think more importantly, Eastern flubbed the ball by losing the first two games of MAC competition, and at one point were 1-5 in the league. So who wants to come to games when the MAC season was essentially over. What's to get excited about?

That is a ridiculous excuse. 1-5 and the season is over? What's to get excited about? If you are a student, it is YOUR team. How about having pride in your school? Isn't that enough to get excited about? I don't buy that for one second. It's an excuse and nothing more.

(03-15-2015 01:56 PM)emu steve Wrote:  

(03-15-2015 01:51 PM)emussuperfan Wrote:  

(03-15-2015 01:43 PM)emu79 Wrote:  1. Okay I think it can only help not hurt recruiting.
2. Agreed. I felt last year's team was worthy of a NIT bid but the powers that be didn't see that way. I'm more concerned about our instate reputation.
3. Agreed, but we all realize that Murphy gets what a $40,000 bonus?
4. To be honest what fanbase? Attendance at home football and basketball games continues to be a challenge. People keep saying if we win people will come okay the men's team had two 20 game winning seasons and we still are attendance challenged and the women's team finished an inspirational season which I hope will see increased interest and attendance next year.

The reason they don't is because they're not stupid, no one i there right mind ( im called crazy carl) would pay to watch d1 team whipe the floor with naia four times in a season even most of the d1 teams were pour teams at best.

The OOC schedule is an issue, but NO real fan could doubt that the NINE MAC games were the real deal.

EMU offered a MAC schedule (only) package (with the option to buy UofM or MSU also). Ten games. Roughly 100 bucks.

I am real fan and i do doubt because only one or two quality wins.

(03-15-2015 01:02 PM)emu steve Wrote:  CBI isn't about:

1). Recruiting. No effect.

Obviously, I disagree. Neither of us has hard evidence either way, so I won't argue. However, I am curious what your logic is to come to such a matter of fact conclusion...

(03-15-2015 01:02 PM)emu steve Wrote:  3). Financial windfall or hit. No (real) effect (either way).

emu79 has a real good point here on the $40k coaches bonus on top of the entrance fee of $75k. It is pretty subjective at the least to say it is not a financial hit.

(03-15-2015 01:02 PM)emu steve Wrote:  It is basically about playing one or more additional games with the chance to play for a 16 team tourney. Win two games and advance to the semis. Then it becomes fun for the players - the chance to win a tourney.

That's it??? If this were the case, there is no way to justify the expense. You could spend the same money on a couple non-conference opponents of similar quality. This would appease the players competitive spirit, appeal to fan base, improve in-season development, increase odds of success for the MAC season, and boost credentials for seedings (or at-large considerations) at "real" tournaments- if they are in that position, of course. Players would be much happier with this in the long run.

I do advocate for the CBI participation even with the expense as I believe it has a beneficial effect on the program in the ways you are claiming it does not. I could be wrong about this. But how can you advocate throwing around big money that belongs to the University/Students because "it feels good"????

Dear Bob,
Check around the country with schools that are struggling record wise. You can believe what you want, but schools that are not doing well, aren't doing well attendance wise. You and I my be die-hard fans regardless of records, but people today are a different breed. Even the U-M this past football season started to have 10,000 people not show up because they were doing poorly.

As of today the cbi has no sponsors.

(03-15-2015 03:01 PM)rayEMU Wrote:  

(03-15-2015 01:02 PM)emu steve Wrote:  CBI isn't about:

1). Recruiting. No effect.

Obviously, I disagree. Neither of us has hard evidence either way, so I won't argue. However, I am curious what your logic is to come to such a matter of fact conclusion...

(03-15-2015 01:02 PM)emu steve Wrote:  3). Financial windfall or hit. No (real) effect (either way).

emu79 has a real good point here on the $40k coaches bonus on top of the entrance fee of $75k. It is pretty subjective at the least to say it is not a financial hit.

(03-15-2015 01:02 PM)emu steve Wrote:  It is basically about playing one or more additional games with the chance to play for a 16 team tourney. Win two games and advance to the semis. Then it becomes fun for the players - the chance to win a tourney.

That's it??? If this were the case, there is no way to justify the expense. You could spend the same money on a couple non-conference opponents of similar quality. This would appease the players competitive spirit, appeal to fan base, improve in-season development, increase odds of success for the MAC season, and boost credentials for seedings (or at-large considerations) at "real" tournaments- if they are in that position, of course. Players would be much happier with this in the long run.

I do advocate for the CBI participation even with the expense as I believe it has a beneficial effect on the program in the ways you are claiming it does not. I could be wrong about this. But how can you advocate throwing around big money that belongs to the University/Students because "it feels good"????

I'll give my views (quick):

1). It MAY help recruiting by resume building. Murphy writes: "Two consecutive 20+ win seasons. Two consecutive MAC tourneys with multiple wins. Two consecutive post season tourneys.' That's the marketing in me. Sounds impressive.

3). I have no problem with the coaches bonus (much deserved). I'm still NOT sure about the entry fee and how it plays out. Do we pay in? Do we get expenses for a road game? Where did the 75K figure come from? (haven't seen it before). Obviously, no one wants to go on the road, pay expenses and let the other team have the home court and have zero travel expenses. Someone has to pay the expenses of this tourney. No freebies here. In all fairness, I'm not sure we know the true $ costs of this tourney - for either a road or host team.

(03-15-2015 03:42 PM)emu steve Wrote:  

(03-15-2015 03:01 PM)rayEMU Wrote:  

(03-15-2015 01:02 PM)emu steve Wrote:  CBI isn't about:

1). Recruiting. No effect.

Obviously, I disagree. Neither of us has hard evidence either way, so I won't argue. However, I am curious what your logic is to come to such a matter of fact conclusion...

(03-15-2015 01:02 PM)emu steve Wrote:  3). Financial windfall or hit. No (real) effect (either way).

emu79 has a real good point here on the $40k coaches bonus on top of the entrance fee of $75k. It is pretty subjective at the least to say it is not a financial hit.

(03-15-2015 01:02 PM)emu steve Wrote:  It is basically about playing one or more additional games with the chance to play for a 16 team tourney. Win two games and advance to the semis. Then it becomes fun for the players - the chance to win a tourney.

That's it??? If this were the case, there is no way to justify the expense. You could spend the same money on a couple non-conference opponents of similar quality. This would appease the players competitive spirit, appeal to fan base, improve in-season development, increase odds of success for the MAC season, and boost credentials for seedings (or at-large considerations) at "real" tournaments- if they are in that position, of course. Players would be much happier with this in the long run.

I do advocate for the CBI participation even with the expense as I believe it has a beneficial effect on the program in the ways you are claiming it does not. I could be wrong about this. But how can you advocate throwing around big money that belongs to the University/Students because "it feels good"????

I'll give my views (quick):

1). It MAY help recruiting by resume building. Murphy writes: "Two consecutive 20+ win seasons. Two consecutive MAC tourneys with multiple wins. Two consecutive post season tourneys.' That's the marketing in me. Sounds impressive.

3). I have no problem with the coaches bonus (much deserved). I'm still NOT sure about the entry fee and how it plays out. Do we pay in? Do we get expenses for a road game? Where did the 75K figure come from? (haven't seen it before). Obviously, no one wants to go on the road, pay expenses and let the other team have the home court and have zero travel expenses. Someone has to pay the expenses of this tourney. No freebies here. In all fairness, I'm not sure we know the true $ costs of this tourney - for either a road or host team.

Then you need to come up with the money. Attendance down, season ticket holders refusing to renew. Only 2 quality wins and one was the last game of the season. Please! And only 17 wins! And only 19 last year! He's not building for the future he is only filling holes ! 8 seniors last year! 4 this year!

He is like the teapartiers filling in potholes and calling it good enough!

(03-15-2015 03:52 PM)emussuperfan Wrote:  

(03-15-2015 03:42 PM)emu steve Wrote:  

(03-15-2015 03:01 PM)rayEMU Wrote:  

(03-15-2015 01:02 PM)emu steve Wrote:  CBI isn't about:

1). Recruiting. No effect.

Obviously, I disagree. Neither of us has hard evidence either way, so I won't argue. However, I am curious what your logic is to come to such a matter of fact conclusion...

(03-15-2015 01:02 PM)emu steve Wrote:  3). Financial windfall or hit. No (real) effect (either way).

emu79 has a real good point here on the $40k coaches bonus on top of the entrance fee of $75k. It is pretty subjective at the least to say it is not a financial hit.

(03-15-2015 01:02 PM)emu steve Wrote:  It is basically about playing one or more additional games with the chance to play for a 16 team tourney. Win two games and advance to the semis. Then it becomes fun for the players - the chance to win a tourney.

That's it??? If this were the case, there is no way to justify the expense. You could spend the same money on a couple non-conference opponents of similar quality. This would appease the players competitive spirit, appeal to fan base, improve in-season development, increase odds of success for the MAC season, and boost credentials for seedings (or at-large considerations) at "real" tournaments- if they are in that position, of course. Players would be much happier with this in the long run.

I do advocate for the CBI participation even with the expense as I believe it has a beneficial effect on the program in the ways you are claiming it does not. I could be wrong about this. But how can you advocate throwing around big money that belongs to the University/Students because "it feels good"????

I'll give my views (quick):

1). It MAY help recruiting by resume building. Murphy writes: "Two consecutive 20+ win seasons. Two consecutive MAC tourneys with multiple wins. Two consecutive post season tourneys.' That's the marketing in me. Sounds impressive.

3). I have no problem with the coaches bonus (much deserved). I'm still NOT sure about the entry fee and how it plays out. Do we pay in? Do we get expenses for a road game? Where did the 75K figure come from? (haven't seen it before). Obviously, no one wants to go on the road, pay expenses and let the other team have the home court and have zero travel expenses. Someone has to pay the expenses of this tourney. No freebies here. In all fairness, I'm not sure we know the true $ costs of this tourney - for either a road or host team.

Then you need to come up with the money. Attendance down, season ticket holders refusing to renew. Only 2 quality wins and one was the last game of the season. Please! And only 17 wins! And only 19 last year! He's not building for the future he is only filling holes ! 8 seniors last year! 4 this year!

How much do we need to come up with? That was the question I was asking.

Does ANYONE know the costs for a home game? A road game?

How can we have an intelligent conversation without facts?