I'm not sure how to interpret this article. In one paragraph he seems to be defending the CBI against some peoples thoughts that it's a joke, but then he kind of gives the impression that he feels that BU is getting unjust benefits from it. Kind of like the attitude that BU can say they got 20 wins, got post season victories and maybe a championship, but nobody will the be the wiser that those came in a meaningless tourney, unless they look it up.
Honestly, the NIT is just as meaningless, and/or just as benificial, however you want to look at it, as the CBI is. What does it really mean to win the NIT anymore? The NIT and the CBI both give teams the opportunity to keep playing for themselves, the school, and the fans and both provide valuable practice, playing time for returning players. You play to win, and play the best you can so nobody can defame you or your school, and like JL says, there is a championship to be won, it might as well be BU, but to suggest that a possible CBI Championship from BU might draw snickers from the folks in Bloomington Normal because ISU was in the NIT instead of the "meaningless" CBI is the real joke.
I watch a ton of college basketball and watched the majority of the NIT last year, and honestly I'm having a tough time remembering who won the NIT last year, in fact I can't recall who did win. Now I can tell you immediately who won the NCAA for the better part of the last 20 years, the NIT though, nope. So really, how much prestige, or how beneficial is it to win the NIT vs CBI, other than the valuable playing time, and personal reasons for the coaches, players, and fans of the schools involved. These 2 tourneys maybe more similar than a lot of people think.
Meaningless college bowl games are a whole other beast I won't go into.