Around the Horn mention CBI/BU

[BradleyBrave]

I'm not putting words in your mouth. You actually said them.

In any case, I think we can all agree that ESPN (just like every other huge, national media member) is run by money. Do they observe and report on college basketball objectively? I think for the most part they do -- on the schools and conferences they cover 95 percent of the time. Do I blame them for not covering the MVC more? No, because most people don't really give a squat about the MVC. Most of their audience cares about the major conferences. Can I blame them for their coverage? No. It makes dollars and sense (cents).

I didn't say it was a conspiracy in any point in this conversation. I just said their coverage isn't objective. I can understand why they cover and report (operative words) on the BCS volume-wise. What I don't like is how they pander to the BCS and try to shape public opinion and perception.

[TheAsianSensation]

You people have the right idea, but it's not a conspiracy theory.

It's business. They do what gives them the best chance to make more $$$$$. Every decision is part of that mantra.

It just so happens to hurt the mid majors. They're not going out of their way to hurt them - they just happen to when they go after the $$$$$.

[Toyota12]

As i stated before the only way to recognized is win on a consistent basis and you will be in their conversations!! SIU has been in the tourney quite a fews times in the last 6 years,and when the talking heads discuss them all they talk about is how hard they play defense and win ugly...I think because thay have been consistent they have reputation that they are the team you do not want to play from the valley...So if you build a reputation of a mid major winner then you are always going to be discussed for all kinds of tourney bids..I speak for all mid major teams not just the valley...

[basketball nut]

What I don't like is how they pander to the BCS and try to shape public opinion and perception.

That is the number 1 problem as I see it. Why does everyone want to talk about the major or BCS schools? It is because that is what is talked about on TV all the time. It really comes down to money and the big boys put up the money so that is what we talk about.
I can see the day (probably not that far off) when they divide the D-1 schools into 2 divisions the BCS schools and the rest of the schools and hold tournaments accordingly.
Is the tournament fair today? Not really because there are conferences that the winner of the conference gets in the NCAA and more then likely couldn't keep out of the play-in game in the Valley or other mid-major tournaments. The same thing can be said for some of the BCS schools compared to the MVC, etc but not as much. Look at thow many quality non-conference wins the BCS schools in the tournament had. BU had a much tougher non-conference schedule then many of those schools had. If we had played the same non-conf schedule as Miami we would have probably had 8 more wins.
My point is that many of these schools get into the tournament only because they are from certain conf. (BCS) and not because they are especially deserving.

[brocks]

I'm sure if Duke were 13-18 and got invited, there would be no problem with that.

As to the wisdom of accxepting this bid, I wouldn't want to be the one to tell Jeremy and Daniel that they're finished . . . hang 'em up.

If you get a post-season chance to play, then you play.

[tornado]

I'm sure if Duke were 13-18 and got invited, there would be no problem with that.

As to the wisdom of accxepting this bid, I wouldn't want to be the one to tell Jeremy and Daniel that they're finished . . . hang 'em up.

If you get a post-season chance to play, then you play.

Question...when was the last time a mid-major team got an invitation (not an auto-bid) to a post season tournament when they had a losing (sub-.500) record?
I know it has happened in recent years with Louisville They declined the NIT bid) and other majors in the NIT and has now just happened with Cincy in the CBI.

Bradley received an invitation to the 1955 NCAA with an overall record of 7-19, because it was the routine to invite the two teams who reached the final game the year before (BU lost to LaSalle in 1954 NCAA Title Game).
BU then promptly won their first two games and finished in the Elite Eight on 1955!!
Final record was 9-20....but Bradley was probably considered a "major" back then!

[basketball nut]

I know this is a new tournament but I really like the format of reseading the final 4 and also playing a best of 2 out of 3 format. This almost reminds me of when the ABA started the 3 point shot and everyone thought it was nuts until it finally caught on and now look how it has reshaped basketball. This format may eventually becaome the norm and not the exception. I for one am excited to see how it turns out and wish this tournament many years of success.
PS: anyone notice how evenly matched the teams were last night?

[BradleyBrave]

If you get a post-season chance to play, then you play.

Exactly.

[JBinPeoria]

Back to the original point on PTI...I wasn't fond of Tony's comments on the CBI or the general consensus on Around the Horn that nobody cared about the CBI. Obviously, we all do.

One thing Tony DID mention on PTI was that he felt that midmajors were intentionally snubbed by the NCAA committee and purposely matched against each other so that they will all just GO AWAY. I agree with him on this point completely. Given these general feelings, I was surprised that he was not a little more sympathetic to the CBI.

[BUBraves2006]

I really like PTI and try to listen/watch it on a daily basis (as long as that buffoon Dan LeBatard isn't subbing in...). That being said, I can understand why the guys were skeptical from an outsider's perspective. I guess what we need to understand is that this is just an invitational. Is this really the top 97-113 teams in the country? No, but it's who they picked to participate (and who wanted to be a part of it). I correlate the CBI similarly to something like Great Alaska Shootout during the season. Nobody thinks that it is the most important tournament or is trying to stack up with the bigger ones (like the preseason NIT), but it can still provide fun, competitive basketball for a bunch of schools.

And you're right, both PTI guys said that it's a joke how the mids got seeded against one another. I'd love to be seeing Gonzaga or Butler having a shot to smack down Arizona in the first round rather than them playing another major conference school. But of course, they were seeded there for just that reason - so they could justify a loss to a team like West Virginia.

[Da Coach]

The fact that Selection Committee Chairman Tom O'Connor is the Athletic Director at George Mason makes the selection of so few at-large non-majors, and pitting almost all of them against each other even harder to figure. You'd think he would have a good concept of what mid-majors are capable of if given the fair chance.

[BradleyBrave]

The fact that Selection Committee Chairman Tom O'Connor is the Athletic Director at George Mason makes the selection of so few at-large non-majors, and pitting almost all of them against each other even harder to figure. You'd think he would have a good concept of what mid-majors are capable of if given the fair chance.

Unless there were larger motivating factors involved, which I suspect there probably was.

[VeveJones007]

If anyone actually saw the game, then I challenge you to try to tell me the name of the Alabama State head coach or what he looked like, since just as the camera panned to Thad Matta 98% of the time during time outs, they also went right to ASU's Herb Sendek almost every time, and virtually NEVER to the Alabama State bench.

I wasn't paying too much attention to the ASU-ASU game, but I had it playing in the background and I remember a pretty long discussion about Alabama State's head coach. They talked about how good of a player he was (I think they said 3rd round pick). They talked about how his wife is the coach of the women's team, and how they coordinate scheduling so as to take road trips with both teams. They talked about the debate in their family as to who was the better player. This was just playing in the background while I did some work and I can give you a whole paragraph about the Alabama St coach. I understand your point though, it's not without merit.

But really folks, why get so worked up over the Marketing Sports Network? About all you'll get on that family of networks are games, scores, and analysts who either don't know what they're talking about or they haven't studied something enough to give a qualified opinion...if you're looking for quality, objective analysis please please please go somewhere else.

Note: not everyone on ESPN is a buffoon, but the benefit you get is minimal compared to the loads of crap you have to digest from the others