Curious, very curious

1

1980hawk

Member
Just read a quote from Illanoy AD Thomas. He says they have no interest in going to any tourny other than the NIT. Where have I heard that line before? But of course the Big Ten has no "official" policy against the CBI. What a crock.
 
I am going to be a little irritated if the NIT choose to select Illinois,a team that has has gone 2-10 in their last dozen games,and has fired their coach,over an Iowa team on the rise,who has won 4 of its last 7 , beat the Illini,and has an excited fanbase.

It will parallel their football team that was selected for a bowl game after an 0-6 finish to their season,and having fired their coach....and yea,the went out and lost that bowl game.
 
DwayneTwill said:
Good for Illinois, and good for the Big Ten.
Click to expand...

Why? You seem to have some "Notre Dame pride" in you.

Please explain why this is good. You don't want Iowa to play in more games? You want Matt Gatens to be done playing?

Please broaden your comments on this. Why is it "good for the Big Ten"? Are we too good to let programs who have struggled the change to play more games?
 
It's good for the Big Ten because the regular season has to have some sort of consequence. It has to matter whether or not you actually, you know, win some games instead of lose them. If there aren't any stakes for each game, if every team gets to go to a tournament no matter what, then what's the point?

For teams from conferences that just don't get the chances to make NCAA outside of winning their conference tourney, I get it. But when you play in the Big Ten you have every opportunity to make the big dance or the NIT. Iowa had those chances and they didn't do enough to make themselves at least a no-brainer for the NIT. (I still think they'll get in, but that's beside the point). How many consolation prizes do you want to give them? Does everybody get a trophy?
 
I see it as an opportunity for seniors to get another chance to play and as an opportunity for extra practice.

I guess I don't really see how it is a "everyone gets a participation trophy" type of thing.
 
1980hawk said:
Just read a quote from Illanoy AD Thomas. He says they have no interest in going to any tourny other than the NIT. Where have I heard that line before? But of course the Big Ten has no "official" policy against the CBI. What a crock.
Click to expand...

So you actually believe it is a league wide conspiracy? Isn't it time for you to get to your 9-11 was an inside job meeting with the only other people in the world that are this stupid?
 
Illannoy is a completely different situation than we are.


I have no problem with the B10 requiring teams have a winning record before they can play in a tournament, but anything beyond that is BS.
 
CGHawk said:
I see it as an opportunity for seniors to get another chance to play and as an opportunity for extra practice.

I guess I don't really see how it is a "everyone gets a participation trophy" type of thing.
Click to expand...

It's a participation trophy event because you have to pay to play. Imagine you were coaching a high school team that got bounced from your district and were then invited to play in a "tournament" with other district losers that cost your school $2,000. Would you do it, or would you tell your team: sorry, we had our shot and we didn't deliver-- that's how sports work.
 
The CBI is a loser tournament and as much as it pains me, Iowa IS too good for it. The CBI should have never been conceived. And yes, there are far to many bowl games, as well, for those using the football argument.
 
Tskinner said:
So you actually believe it is a league wide conspiracy? Isn't it time for you to get to your 9-11 was an inside job meeting with the only other people in the world that are this stupid?
Click to expand...

There is no conspiracy. Don't mean to imply that at all. But I just wish the BIG would come out and admit that its member teams will not participate in that tourny.
 
Cydkar said:
The CBI is a loser tournament and as much as it pains me, Iowa IS too good for it. The CBI should have never been conceived. And yes, there are far to many bowl games, as well, for those using the football argument.
Click to expand...

the difference is, in football you get a whole month of practice instead of a few days.
 
A "losers" tournament is to strong of a word the CBI is just another post season tournament like the NIT. The only tournament that really matters is the NCAA. But if given the opportunity it would be nice to see Iowa in a post season tournament and I could careless which one.
 
olivecourt said:
It's a participation trophy event because you have to pay to play. Imagine you were coaching a high school team that got bounced from your district and were then invited to play in a "tournament" with other district losers that cost your school $2,000. Would you do it, or would you tell your team: sorry, we had our shot and we didn't deliver-- that's how sports work.
Click to expand...

I guess that makes more sense. I don't know much about the CBI. If it weren't costly--I would think it would be good practice/fun for the players.

DwayneTwill said:
Seriously?
Click to expand...

Yes. I didn't know it was costly for the team to enter. I thought it was just teams that weren't quite good enough to make the cut for the NIT got invited. I thought it was just supposed to be an opportunity to keep playing/have fun/compete a few more times.

I'll admit that I don't know much about the CBI. That is why I said I didn't see why it was seen as a "participation trophy" type of deal.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Share this page

Top