Jump to content

THE BRIGHT SIDE

dyedinthewool

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 75
  • Created
  • Last Reply
IU Scott

IU Scott

Posted
Posted
38 minutes ago, CauseThatsMyDJ said:

Whether you like it or not, Fred Glass thinks we are above the CBI. Not a discussion worth having.

I think we are to and CBI is mainly made up of mid major teams happy to get the opportunity to play in a post season tournament.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest

Guest

Posted
Posted
59 minutes ago, IU Scott said:

I think we are to and CBI is mainly made up of mid major teams happy to get the opportunity to play in a post season tournameonnt.

While not traditional "blue bloods" I did look up all the schools that have accepted CBI bids since that tournament started in 2001.

From the Power 5 conferences and the Big East:

Butler,Cincinnati, Colorado, Creighton,Oregon, Penn St., Purdue, Pitt, St. Johns,Stanford, TCU, Texas,Texas A & M. Utah, Virginia, Washington, Washington st.

Two other programs of note that have accepted--Houston 3 times and Wichita St once.

The rest of the participants are mainly mid-majors. 

Some interesting names on there, including one of last year's Final Four participants as well as two schools that this year could be considered championship contenders. 

Is IU at a place where they are too mighty/proud/arrogant to accept an invitation?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
5fouls

5fouls

Posted
Posted

The CBI discussion is related to the broader discussion about our status as a program.  Despite what happened 30+ years ago, IU is no longer an elite college basketball program.  We're not Duke, UNC, Kansas, UK, or even Michigan State or Villanova.   We are Stanford, Oklahoma, Arkansas, Notre Dame, Marquette, and Penn State. 

The banners are old.  The  balcony in Assembly Hall is empty for conference games.  And, we miss the tournament just as much or more often than we make it.  Those are not the trademarks of an elite basketball program.  So, we can continue to sit on our high horse, watch other programs pass us by, and be happy with 6th-8th place conference finishes and NIT bids, or we can start realizing that 'It's Indiana' just doesn't mean anything to today's generation. 

Romeo Langford is 18 years old.  He would have been 2 when IU played in the 2002 National Championship game.  And, even if he was a 2 year old prodigy and was able to follow that tournament, he would have understood that was somewhat of a fluke run to the Championship game.  There were some competitors and big hearts on that team for sure, but they still were fortunate to be there in the end.  The last time IU was truly relevant  for multiple seasons in a row were the Cheaney years. 

Are we too 'good' for the CBI?  No, we are not.  We are a CBI caliber team this season.  We were a CBI caliber team at the end of last season.  We were a CBI caliber team two years before that.  Seems to me that we are more CBI worthy than NCAA worthy these days.  1987 was a long time ago.      CCNY, LaSalle, San Francisco, and Loyola of Chicago have storied basketball histories as well.    That does not make them relevant today.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
rico

rico

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, 5fouls said:

The CBI discussion is related to the broader discussion about our status as a program.  Despite what happened 30+ years ago, IU is no longer an elite college basketball program.  We're not Duke, UNC, Kansas, UK, or even Michigan State or Villanova.   We are Stanford, Oklahoma, Arkansas, Notre Dame, Marquette, and Penn State. 

The banners are old.  The  balcony in Assembly Hall is empty for conference games.  And, we miss the tournament just as much or more often than we make it.  Those are not the trademarks of an elite basketball program.  So, we can continue to sit on our high horse, watch other programs pass us by, and be happy with 6th-8th place conference finishes and NIT bids, or we can start realizing that 'It's Indiana' just doesn't mean anything to today's generation. 

Romeo Langford is 18 years old.  He would have been 2 when IU played in the 2002 National Championship game.  And, even if he was a 2 year old prodigy and was able to follow that tournament, he would have understood that was somewhat of a fluke run to the Championship game.  There were some competitors and big hearts on that team for sure, but they still were fortunate to be there in the end.  The last year IU was truly relevant  for multiple seasons in a row were the Cheaney years. 

Are we too 'good' for the CBI?  No, we are not.  We are a CBI caliber team this season.  We were a CBI caliber team at the end of last season.  We were a CBI caliber team two years before that.  Seems to me that we are more CBI worthy than NCAA worthy these days.  1987 was a long time ago.      CCNY, LaSalle, San Francisco, and Loyola of Chicago have storied basketball histories as well.    That does not make them relevant today.

 

 

And that my friend is one fine post and one I enjoyed reading........but you did leave out DePaul!  LOL

Link to comment
Share on other sites
5fouls

5fouls

Posted
Posted
Just now, rico said:

And that my friend is one fine post and one I enjoyed reading........but you did leave out DePaul!  LOL

LOL.  I was taking one from each conference and grabbed Marquette from the Big East.  Could have easily been DePaul.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
rico

rico

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, 5fouls said:

LOL.  I was taking one from each conference and grabbed Marquette from the Big East.  Could have easily been DePaul.

LOL, I understand........I could have said St. John's.  But I agree with you whole heartedly.  We are basically the mirror image of the Notre Dame football program.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hoosierhoopster

Hoosierhoopster

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, rico said:

So we are better than that?  Hmmmmm

Yes Rico, we are. Along with every other storied program that chooses not to participate in that ridiculous little tourney. I mean, I guess it's good for PU... Advocating participating in this pathetic tourney leaves me wondering -- why? Why in the world do you think that's a good idea? I mean, even leaving aside that it's a pathetic little tourney that no program like IU participates in, exactly how would that benefit this team? It won't help IU, it won't help CAM, our senior guards are graduating, it's utterly pointless. What a complete waste of time.

Or hey, golly, I wonder how that would play out in recruiting?  Hey Romeo -- look at us, we're competing in the CBI! Or golly, I wonder what guys like Izzo, et al. would say about that? Seriously?????

Link to comment
Share on other sites
rico

rico

Posted
Posted
14 minutes ago, Hoosierhoopster said:

Yes Rico, we are. Along with every other storied program that chooses not to participate in that ridiculous little tourney. I mean, I guess it's good for PU... Advocating participating in this pathetic tourney leaves me wondering -- why? Why in the world do you think that's a good idea? I mean, even leaving aside that it's a pathetic little tourney that no program like IU participates in, exactly how would that benefit this team? It won't help IU, it won't help CAM, our senior guards are graduating, it's utterly pointless. What a complete waste of time.

Or hey, golly, I wonder how that would play out in recruiting?  Hey Romeo -- look at us, we're competing in the CBI! Or golly, I wonder what guys like Izzo, et al. would say about that? Seriously?????

Hey Romeo, we ain't playing in nothing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hoosierhoopster

Hoosierhoopster

Posted
Posted
10 minutes ago, rico said:

You better.  Because that is the way it is.

No it's not. Sad Rico. We're two seasons removed from winning our second recent B1G regular season title. We played in SW16s under Crean. We were the Nation's longest running #1 team under Crean. We beat UK, UNC, etc. under Crean. We beat more top 5 teams in the same season than anyone else, under Crean. Crean wasn't good enough, or perceived to be good enough, to take IU past the SW16 to winnng FFs again and playing for the NC again, and it's definitely been too long since we've been there, but that doesn't remove that we remain a storied program with multiple banners. I know you love PU, that's your right, but no, IU is not PU. Later.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
rico

rico

Posted
Posted
Just now, slojoe said:

There will be little competition in the CBI.  We have a lot of players graduating.  I think the time would be better spent practicing and working on individual skills.

You don't play the seniors.  Simple as that.  They can stay home.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
rico

rico

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, Hoosierhoopster said:

No it's not. Sad Rico. We're two seasons removed from winning our second recent B1G regular season title. We played in SW16s under Crean. We were the Nation's longest running #1 team under Crean. We beat UK, UNC, etc. under Crean. We beat more top 5 teams in the same season than anyone else, under Crean. Crean wasn't good enough, or perceived to be good enough, to take IU past the SW16 to winnng FFs again and playing for the NC again, and it's definitely been too long since we've been there, but that doesn't remove that we remain a storied program with multiple banners. I know you love PU, that's your right, but no, IU is not PU. Later.

Hmmmmmmmmm.  Better get some coffee.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites
rico

rico

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, Hoosierhoopster said:

Yeah, you think the CBI is better? Tell me who is competing in the CBI? This argument is a waste of time.

What I am saying is that the CBI would be good for the young guys.  Let them play.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing


×
×
  • Create New...