Colorado senior quits team because of CBI bid
Poor CBI. Nobody wants to play in the thing.
These teams all declined bids last night: Michigan, Minnesota, Penn State, Tennessee, Memphis, Oregon State, Cal.
The CBI field is brutal. The only major conference team is Colorado, and one of their seniors literally quit the team because he didn't want to play in the CBI.
Who does that? Who just says "yeah......I'll take a pass on that one. See ya, guys. It was a fun 4 years" before postseason play?
March 16th, 2015 at 11:37 AM ^
Womp womp.
March 16th, 2015 at 11:39 AM ^
What's the reason these Power 5 schools decline bids to the CBI and CIT. Is it any other reason besides....well...those tourneys suck?
March 16th, 2015 at 11:51 AM ^
The CBI charges them for the opportunity to play crappy opponents.
March 16th, 2015 at 11:40 AM ^
Go play intramurals, brother. Go play intramurals.
March 16th, 2015 at 11:40 AM ^
The Colorado coach is a joke for accepting a spot in this tournament, and a senior player with an injury and professional aspirations should not be focuisng on a completely meaningless tournament.
March 16th, 2015 at 11:54 AM ^
doesn't want to play that is his call, but I actually can appreciate what the coach is saying here. He thinks his team is playing well, probably picking up on what he is teaching, and somebody is asking, "do you want to play a little more?" and he accepted the opportunity. I mean, in the conference call with Beilein, he makes it a point to say that the available weekly hours go from 20 to 2 not that the season is over. It sounds like the Colorado coach is saying that he will take the 20 for a couple more weeks.
I think Michigan and Colorado are two seperate things here. Michigan is two years removed from the national title game, a CBI "bid" could actually damage the brand. Colorado is Colorado. I can certainly see why Michigan would decline it and Colorado would take it.
March 16th, 2015 at 12:16 PM ^
March 16th, 2015 at 12:26 PM ^
you do know that Colorado played in the past 3 NCAA tourneys. It ain't like they are Northwestern.
March 16th, 2015 at 12:51 PM ^
that I did not know that, despite watching all of them closely, shows you how meaningful they are to the college basketball scene. That is to say, not at all.
Sorry if it sounded like I was calling you out because I didn't mean to. That said, you cannot wave off Colorado's success because you didn't know it. This is simply not a program in desperate need of playing in a low level tourney.
They have massively under acheived as of late. Alec Burks, Spencer Dinwiddie & Andre Roberson are all in the NBA. Granted Dinwiddie was injured for a bit, but they have had some talent.
March 17th, 2015 at 11:07 AM ^
also the Mountain and West Coast teams just don't get much attention on this side of the Country---particularly if Bill Walton sucks up all of the attention.
March 16th, 2015 at 11:42 AM ^
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
March 16th, 2015 at 11:46 AM ^
What do you get for competing in these? Are they even televised? Do they make money? Do the schools make money? Are they on campus or neutral site?
Seriously I've never watched a game of these tournaments and hadn't heard of either until this year. I'll watch the NIT occasionally, but I don't even know who has the rights to these games.
of a joke as I have always considered this tournament to be, I just looked at the tournament history on wiki and its past champions really were not all that bad. It is certainly not a whose who of college basketball elite but it isn't laughable either.
OK, I just have never even heard mention of this tourney until now. Not that I follow college ball super closely but I'm always tuned in this time of year. Just don't get why people thought more tournaments in the postseason were a good idea (I like the preseason ones).
March 16th, 2015 at 12:28 PM ^
if Michigan hosted one of these games, we would be lucky to draw 5000. There is just not interest. The (new) AD and Beilein know what they're doing.
March 16th, 2015 at 11:46 AM ^
"There is a financial risk in playing in the 16-team CBI, which came into existence in 2008, as hosting teams must pay a fee.
In the recent past, that fee has reportedly been $50,000 for hosting in the first round and $75,000 for additional rounds. Considering the tournament's unique best-of-three format for the finals, CU could wind up hosting as many as five games, at a total cost of $350,000. That does not include the logistical costs of actually running each game."
Why in hell would a school agree to that? Especially for a meaningless tournament.
March 16th, 2015 at 11:51 AM ^
I was completely against these tournaments, and now I read this...why would any team accept these terms?
March 16th, 2015 at 12:11 PM ^
If they think they can get enough home fans to cover the costs.
Which is, by definition, risky since you are hosting the CBI.
March 16th, 2015 at 11:52 AM ^
Yeah, that sounds like a piss-poor deal. The only way to make money is to fill up your arena, but you aren't going to fill your arena for such meaningless basketball.
March 16th, 2015 at 11:49 AM ^
The CBI is -- what? -- third in order ... behind NCAA and NIT?
That's a long way from the spotlight.
Heck, the NIT is essentially a consolation tournament. Given the choice of NCAA or NIT, nobody chooses NIT. But if no NCAA, then teams settle for NIT.
CBI is a further step down. If the college senior is really good, then the CBI is an insult. If the college senior has no real chance of going to the pros, then going to the CBI is just a waste of time.
March 16th, 2015 at 11:56 AM ^
I think you can't decline NCAA bids anymore.
Not that anyone would.
Expand the NIT to 64 if they're so dead-set on giving everyone a postseason chance ala Football and its 82 bowl games.
The CBI doesn't have a title sponsor this year. Does not look good to say the least.
March 16th, 2015 at 12:59 PM ^
I think you can't decline NCAA bids anymore.
Really?
I can see the argument that nobody in their right mind would decine an NCAA bid.
Are you saying teams are bound by conference agreements to go if they receive a bid? That I can see ... and it's related to being in a right mind category.
I had never heard of the CBI prior to some of the discussions on this board. NIT, yeah ... but not the CBI. Frankly, I think the idea of a tournament beyond NCAA and NIT to be foolish. But there's always someone who thinks they can make such a thing fly. More often than not, they don't.
I doesn't make it any more relevant or anything, but not everyone is Michigan or even Minnesota or whoever. I think it seems less foolish when it's in the context of EMU getting to play some relatively equal competition in maybe their only chance to play in a tournament environment.
That same logic has me thinking that another division split would be a good idea, but that's a thread for another day.
I think it seems less foolish when it's in the context of EMU getting to play some relatively equal competition in maybe their only chance to play in a tournament environment.
I understand that argument ... it's along the lines of what WD was suggesting about expanding NIT to include pretty much everyone not invited to the NCAA.
But more to the point ... if EMU (as an example) can't seem to ever do better than 10-20 for the season, then they're in a conference that's above their abilities. The division split idea you brought up comes into play.
What I can't align with -- and you're not saying this, but there's a thin implication of this bubbling around -- is the idea of every team, regardless of season outcome, playing in some tournament somewhere. That doesn't make any sense to me. The CBI as yet another tournament after NCAA and NIT seems to fall into that camp in my mind.
I'm kind of ambivalent about every team playing somewhere. It's meaningless, but it's not like we'll ever see the CBI champions all over SportsCenter claiming a national championship or anything. I don't think it's much different than playing in the Pizza Bowl.
Whose rule is it? The NCAA's?
March 16th, 2015 at 11:52 AM ^
It would be more accurate to rename this tournament the SOL.
March 16th, 2015 at 11:58 AM ^
March 16th, 2015 at 12:10 PM ^
The CBI has no reason for being. It's the kids-soccer-participation-trophy-so-everybody-can-feel-good-about-themselves of college basketball.
At some point, you've given it your best shot, but you just did not qualify for post-season play. It's over. Move on. We'll get 'em next year.
Not every team should qualify for a post-season tournament.
March 16th, 2015 at 12:14 PM ^
and let's get rid of about 1/2 of the CFB bowl games as well. A 6-6 team should not be playing in the post-season.
March 16th, 2015 at 12:22 PM ^
Agreed. Kids aren't stupid. They know when a "reward" is just a patronizing pat on the head. (Or worse, somebody else's attempt to make an extra buck off of that patronization.)
Not everybody gets to play in the post-season. That's life. Deal.
Besides, it's not like the old days when conferences only sent one team and you could not repeat. The hurdle of having a winning record to play in the post-season - football, basketball, whatever - is not all that unreasonable.
Especially since some schools actually lose money participating in bowl games, and you can hardly say participation in some of the bowls is valuable for the exposure.
March 16th, 2015 at 12:18 PM ^
I heard the teams have to pay their own way to go there.
March 16th, 2015 at 12:30 PM ^
I get not wanting to play as a senior, but I can also understand why the coach would be a little miffed. Yes Colorado is "Colorado" right now, but to a coach it might give him a chance to further cultivate some players and get more practice time with the younger kids, as once the season is over there goes your access to the players. The CBI is a bad beat in many ways and I get why a senior wouldn't want to risk his health, but I do understand why a coach would want to keep playing.
March 16th, 2015 at 12:44 PM ^
if the football team would have gone 6-6 last year and made a shitty bowl people would have been pissed at hoke if he declined the spot because the bowl wasn't prestigious enough because the extra practice time would be beneficial, how is this any different?
March 16th, 2015 at 12:53 PM ^
1 game vs. a tournament.
More people watch football than basketball.
Fun (at least some bowl locations) to travel to vs on campus
Shitty bowls are at least theoretically part of the same system... you could take what you're saying and say any bowl besides the playoff is pointless now. People like bowls. I don't know anyone who's really a fan of the NIT much less these dumb tournaments.
March 16th, 2015 at 12:59 PM ^
Just no.
I think a shitty bowl sometimes makes sense if you need the extra practices. For a well-heeled program, those practices may be worth the price of admission of association with Beef O'Grady's or somesuch.
That is less of an issue in the world of single-elimination basketball, where you might only get a few more practices for the price of losing face appearing in the NGEFTNIT Tournament ("Not Good Enough For The NIT").
Can you imagine if we lost in the CBI? I don't think I could survive another semester and a half at MSU.
bids this year and I am thinking that would make a more interesting field than what the NIT ended up with.
Where does the article say he "quit the team." It says that the senior is not going to play, it's his decision and the coach accepts that. "Quits the team" has a far, far more negative connotation and different meaning than what the article represents.
reading comprehension FTW
I didn't see it either lol, I don't think OP even read the article
Probably better for the team to see what it will look like next year without him, anyway, and the guy needs to rest up for evaluations. It's not like he refused to play in the NCAAs or anything.
"Boyle didn't give a reason for Booker's decision, but it's been well documented that the 6-foot-2 guard has been playing with sore hips the past few weeks. Booker also has aspirations of playing professionally, so this may be an opportunity for him to rest up before training for a possible pro career."
Where does it say that he didn't want to play bc of the tournament?
Colorado's 1940 NIT Championship Team
