PonyFans.com

Thanks to the masses who could help. I goofed on UAB in the NIT. Interesting that Houston went to the CBI.

I saw UAB in the NIT and Houston accepted the other new one (cbi) last week.

UH accepted the CBI bid last week before NIT selection came out. UAB plays VCU in round one of the NIT.

Tulsa, UH and UTEP represent CUSA in the new tournament: http://www.gazellegroup.com/cbi/index_main.htm

Interesting that the market is that huge -- enough to merit another worthless tournament. This is really analagous to football having so many bowls. Good for the schools, money-wise, I suppose; not always good for watching great games. But I suppose there are more good games to be had in CBB that in FB, purely because of the number of teams.

Whatever.

smu diamond m wrote:Good for the schools, money-wise, I suppose

Not when you are the host school in the CBI - the tournament requires all host schools to pay $60,000 for the right to host a game.

That is why we saw teams like New Mexico State turning down invitations to play in the CBI

They PAY $60K? No way they make up that cash at UH. Why accept that? Just to keep playing? Seems like a slap in the players' faces.

Pony4Life wrote:They PAY $60K? No way they make up that cash at UH. Why accept that? Just to keep playing? Seems like a slap in the players' faces.

That's why UH is not hosting. A story that I saw on UH did suggest that Penders and the players asked AD Dave Maggard to accept the bid because they did want to keep playing. However, they arranged to not be a host so they wouldn't have to pay.

Here is a story on NMSU turning down a bid based on money. This article says $50,000...I have seen $60,000 as the number elsewhere.
http://www.lcsun-news.com/sports/ci_8598289

Salt Lake Tribune notes that Missouri also turned down the bid due to money:
http://www.sltrib.com/sports/ci_8598769

smu diamond m wrote:Interesting that the market is that huge -- enough to merit another worthless tournament.

I doubt that it is. I wouldn't be surprised if this only lasts a year or two. The lower bowls only survive because of the ESPN TV contracts. This thing is apparently going to be on Fox College Sports TV, which I didn't know existed. It appears to only be available to digital cable subscribers and even then is limited in distribution.

What's interesting about the CBI is that the finals is best of three.

regis wrote:What's interesting about the CBI is that the finals is best of three.

Yeah, and they make the teams travel twice instead of doing it 1 game at place A, 2 games at place B. There's no way the teams can make any money out of this deal, between paying to host and the requisite travel.

MustangStealth wrote:There's no way the teams can make any money out of this deal, between paying to host and the requisite travel.

Aren't the travel costs coming out of the guarantees?

$50K - $60K shouldn't be much for a school with a good following, but the Gazelle Group may want to adjust the amount next year. If they are simply pocketing the entire amount of the host fees, a lower amount (at least the first couple of years) would be better in order to allow the tournament to develop.

Still seems like a joke to me.

The CBI is a joke. One of their participants is 13-18 Cincinnati. I know other teams rejected an offer to play in it like Missour but come on. That's a sure way to kill the credibility of your tournament.

George S. Patton wrote:The CBI is a joke. One of their participants is 13-18 Cincinnati. I know other teams rejected an offer to play in it like Missour but come on. That's a sure way to kill the credibility of your tournament.

of course its a joke, the winner of the CBI can stake claim at being the 98th best team in College Basketball