Did we decline a CBI bid, or were we not asked?

[Quaoarsking]

I saw Florida, Tennessee, and South Carolina were all formally asked but declined, along with Michigan, Penn State, and Florida State, among others. Not sure about Auburn, but they aren't in it.

The CBI bracket (found here) only includes 1 major conference team (Colorado), and I bet they would have wanted more. There are 3 teams without winning records in there (Colorado, Seattle, and Delaware State), and several teams in there with a similar RPI to ours:
174 - Hofstra
203 - Vermont
204 - Delaware State
212 - Mercer
280 - Seattle (WTF 280??)

So did they not call us, despite calling several similar-resume teams with much smaller fanbases? Or did we tell them no? I think it might have been a good idea to play in the tournament if we'd had the chance -- get some momentum for next year playing teams that even we would probably beat.


ETA: Before people start saying we're too good to play in the CBI, remember that if Butler, Cincinnati, Creighton, George Mason, Houston, Oregon State, Penn State, Pittsburgh, Purdue, Santa Clara, St. John's, St. Louis, Stanford, TCU, Texas, Texas A&M, VCU, Virginia, Washington, Washington State, and Wichita State (source) aren't too good for the CBI, we aren't either, especially in the state our program is currently in.

[Bully13]

what sport are you talking about?

[Dawg61]

CBI asked ****ing SEATTLE before us! Wow thanks SS

[chef dixon]

Do you not have to have an at least .500 record?

[Quaoarsking]

Do you not have to have an at least .500 record?

No, often the major conference teams don't -- Colorado doesn't this year, Texas A&M didn't last year, Purdue didn't in 2013, etc. Not sure if anyone as bad as 13-19 before, but surely they would have taken ANY major conference team over a team like Seattle with a 280 RPI and 7-7 in the 31st best conference (WAC).

[Ralph]

They wanted a competitive tournament

[sandjunky]

We didn't pass the "eye" test for the CBI

[lachepas565]

A&M did it a year or so ago, but I remember something along the lines of the SEC not liking it. It's a crap tournament and you have to pay to get in. Not sure why anyone would want it.

I saw Florida, Tennessee, and South Carolina were all formally asked but declined, along with Michigan, Penn State, and Florida State, among others. Not sure about Auburn, but they aren't in it.

The CBI bracket (found here) only includes 1 major conference team (Colorado), and I bet they would have wanted more. There are 3 teams without winning records in there (Colorado, Seattle, and Delaware State), and several teams in there with a similar RPI to ours:
174 - Hofstra
203 - Vermont
204 - Delaware State
212 - Mercer
280 - Seattle (WTF 280??)

So did they not call us, despite calling several similar-resume teams with much smaller fanbases? Or did we tell them no? I think it might have been a good idea to play in the tournament if we'd had the chance -- get some momentum for next year playing teams that even we would probably beat.


ETA: Before people start saying we're too good to play in the CBI, remember that if Butler, Cincinnati, Creighton, George Mason, Houston, Oregon State, Penn State, Pittsburgh, Purdue, Santa Clara, St. John's, St. Louis, Stanford, TCU, Texas, Texas A&M, VCU, Virginia, Washington, Washington State, and Wichita State (source) aren't too good for the CBI, we aren't either, especially in the state our program is currently in.

[msstate7]

I wanted cbi when it was apparent the nit was out, but we don't deseeve postseason play. Had we finished strong to get to .500, I wouldve been in favor of paying to play, but not with our results

[Goat from MSU]

We were not ask ,you have to be within 2 games of .500. We have been in the past asked 2 times turned down both times.Yes SEC does not want their teams in CIT or CBI .

[Johnson85]

I saw Florida, Tennessee, and South Carolina were all formally asked but declined, along with Michigan, Penn State, and Florida State, among others. Not sure about Auburn, but they aren't in it.

The CBI bracket (found here) only includes 1 major conference team (Colorado), and I bet they would have wanted more. There are 3 teams without winning records in there (Colorado, Seattle, and Delaware State), and several teams in there with a similar RPI to ours:
174 - Hofstra
203 - Vermont
204 - Delaware State
212 - Mercer
280 - Seattle (WTF 280??)

So did they not call us, despite calling several similar-resume teams with much smaller fanbases? Or did we tell them no? I think it might have been a good idea to play in the tournament if we'd had the chance -- get some momentum for next year playing teams that even we would probably beat.


ETA: Before people start saying we're too good to play in the CBI, remember that if Butler, Cincinnati, Creighton, George Mason, Houston, Oregon State, Penn State, Pittsburgh, Purdue, Santa Clara, St. John's, St. Louis, Stanford, TCU, Texas, Texas A&M, VCU, Virginia, Washington, Washington State, and Wichita State (source) aren't too good for the CBI, we aren't either, especially in the state our program is currently in.

I don't think we're too good for it, but it wouldn't provide much benefit to us right now. We don't have a particularly young team, and we aren't losing a ton. If we were a team full of freshmen and sophomores that could benefit from more ingame experience, or if we were losing most of our contributors and wanted to let our young guys get minutes (although if you're losing most of your minutes and still didn't get into the NIT even, you probably don't have young players that are going to help you), it could be justified.

And our fans just want the season to be over, so it's not like they're going to be clamoring to buy tickets.

And I seriously doubt CBI is a money making venture to begin with, so we'd just be spending money to play games our fans don't want to watch with players that don't need the experience.