Looked up the participants in the CBI, didn't realize how bad it was...haven't had a even halfway decent conference participant since Colorado three years ago. Ugh. Interestingly, when we played in '14, there were participants from the Pac 12 (OSU), Big Ten (PSU), and SEC (A&M) along with some traditionally pretty decent schools from smaller conferences (Fresno St, Princeton, UTEP, ODU). Seems to have gone downhill pretty fast since.GSx wrote:What you describe is why a team might choose not to play in the NIT. The policy not to play in those period has nothing to do with team...it is a matter of league.ml wave wrote:Rules are made to be broken and policies aren't even rules. The policy makes sense for higher profile teams with disappointing seasons (your UConns and whatnot) but wonder if an exception would be made for a young up and coming team? More curious than anything since I don't think it's that big of a deal either way.PeteRasche wrote:Paul is a junior. But his play lately has merited this situation regardless.Rotorooter wrote:Frankly, Paul, being a senior, should only see the floor if Ajang and Koka foul out.
Anyway, it's moot. The AAC has a no pay tourney policy.
AAC is a power basketball league. Teams in power leagues do not play in pay for play tournaments, nor should they.
"Young up and coming" - some nice code there.
Not sure what I was "coding" here? Simply meant a team on the upswing.