MBBALL WHAT IF…….

[Sport]

I haven’t thought this all the way through but I’ll throw it out for discussion. We all know the BSC Tournament is in Boise. Has been for several years now and they do a pretty good job. The one thing lacking, through no fault of the hosts, is attendance for the games. Not to change the tournament site but to change the Championship Game? And the same for the ladies.
Just an example, say the Griz and Portland State end up in the Championship game. Instead of playing the game Saturday night in Boise play it in the team with the best record in their arena on the following Monday night? Crowds would obviously be better and having it on Monday night we could possibly get a better TV deal and it would give the conference better exposure.
One reason the Championship is held in a predetermined site like Boise is it’s easier and cheaper for hotels, airfare etc. Now it only impacting one team and their fan base. Example if it was held in Missoula, Dahlberg arena would sell out and we could do a revenue share to offset the opposing teams airfare. For a championship game the diehard fans would most likely absorb the added cost to travel. Imagine if last years Championship game between the cats and the Griz were held in Missoula? Most likely the Griz would have won and the better/best team would have gone onto the NCAA tournament.
Looking for reasons why this wouldn’t work?

 

[GrizWin99]

I haven’t thought this all the way through but I’ll throw it out for discussion. We all know the BSC Tournament is in Boise. Has been for several years now and they do a pretty good job. The one thing lacking, through no fault of the hosts, is attendance for the games. Not to change the tournament site but to change the Championship Game? And the same for the ladies.
Just an example, say the Griz and Portland State end up in the Championship game. Instead of playing the game Saturday night in Boise play it in the team with the best record in their arena on the following Monday night? Crowds would obviously be better and having it on Monday night we could possibly get a better TV deal and it would give the conference better exposure.
One reason the Championship is held in a predetermined site like Boise is it’s easier and cheaper for hotels, airfare etc. Now it only impacting one team and their fan base. Example if it was held in Missoula, Dahlberg arena would sell out and we could do a revenue share to offset the opposing teams airfare. For a championship game the diehard fans would most likely absorb the added cost to travel. Imagine if last years Championship game between the cats and the Griz were held in Missoula? Most likely the Griz would have won and the better/best team would have gone onto the NCAA tournament.
Looking for reasons why this wouldn’t work?

This is too rational for the BSC

 

[EverettGriz]

Well, while I like the idea, Monday won't work since Selection Sunday is, well, Sunday.

Look, I've been saying for years the bsc needs to get back to the regular season champ hosting the tournament. As a one-bid league, we should be doing ALL we can to protect our best team. But see, that's not the bsc way. The bsc way is to protect -- at ALL costs and sense of logic -- the lowest common denominator.

I've long given up hoping for sanity or change. The only reasonable action now is to get the hell out of the conference.

 

[MSU01]

I haven’t thought this all the way through but I’ll throw it out for discussion. We all know the BSC Tournament is in Boise. Has been for several years now and they do a pretty good job. The one thing lacking, through no fault of the hosts, is attendance for the games. Not to change the tournament site but to change the Championship Game? And the same for the ladies.
Just an example, say the Griz and Portland State end up in the Championship game. Instead of playing the game Saturday night in Boise play it in the team with the best record in their arena on the following Monday night? Crowds would obviously be better and having it on Monday night we could possibly get a better TV deal and it would give the conference better exposure.
One reason the Championship is held in a predetermined site like Boise is it’s easier and cheaper for hotels, airfare etc. Now it only impacting one team and their fan base. Example if it was held in Missoula, Dahlberg arena would sell out and we could do a revenue share to offset the opposing teams airfare. For a championship game the diehard fans would most likely absorb the added cost to travel. Imagine if last years Championship game between the cats and the Griz were held in Missoula? Most likely the Griz would have won and the better/best team would have gone onto the NCAA tournament.
Looking for reasons why this wouldn’t work?

Even if the championship game were still on Saturday, you couldn't move it to Monday because that would be a day after Selection Sunday. If you're going to play the championship game on a campus site then you might as well just scrap the neutral site altogether and play every single tournament game in the higher seed's home arena. I believe some conferences do it this way although the geographical disparity between teams in the Big Sky would make it a lot harder logistically to pull off.

For me the main draw of the neutral site is that it makes it possible to plan in advance and watch both your men's and women's team play in the same location on about the same days. It certainly isn't great for the #1 seed winning the tournament as often as possible, as the last two years EWU has been bounced out in the quarterfinals from that spot.

 

[MissoulaMarinerFan]

Well, while I like the idea, Monday won't work since Selection Sunday is, well, Sunday.

Look, I've been saying for years the bsc needs to get back to the regular season champ hosting the tournament. As a one-bid league, we should be doing ALL we can to protect our best team. But see, that's not the bsc way. The bsc way is to protect -- at ALL costs and sense of logic -- the lowest common denominator.

I've long given up hoping for sanity or change. The only reasonable action now is to get the hell out of the conference.

They won’t switch back now that they’ve changed to neutral site. The only thing we can hope for is what the WCC does - Seeds 1 & 2 get a double-bye straight to the semifinal round on each side of the bracket.

 

[Griz til I die]

Well, while I like the idea, Monday won't work since Selection Sunday is, well, Sunday.

Look, I've been saying for years the bsc needs to get back to the regular season champ hosting the tournament. As a one-bid league, we should be doing ALL we can to protect our best team. But see, that's not the bsc way. The bsc way is to protect -- at ALL costs and sense of logic -- the lowest common denominator.

I've long given up hoping for sanity or change. The only reasonable action now is to get the hell out of the conference.

Just about every mid major league has moved to a neutral site. There’s hardly any that still do it.

 

[EverettGriz]

Just about every mid major league has moved to a neutral site. There’s hardly any that still do it.

Oh, I know. Doesn't mean it's the right move. And many mid-majors get 2+ teams into the Dance (as well as the NIT). The bsc? Not soooo much.

As I said, we should be doing EVERYthing in our power to protect that one seed. But we're too concerned about eastern being able to afford a few nights at the Motel 6.

 

[ISUguy]

Doesn’t matter who wins the conference tournament — they are destined to get smoked in the NCAA. So no reason to “protect” the top seed. Just enjoy the conference tournament knowing it’s the pinnacle experience for your team and then hope the winner gets at least a 14 seed.

 

[ilovethecats]

Well, while I like the idea, Monday won't work since Selection Sunday is, well, Sunday.

Look, I've been saying for years the bsc needs to get back to the regular season champ hosting the tournament. As a one-bid league, we should be doing ALL we can to protect our best team. But see, that's not the bsc way. The bsc way is to protect -- at ALL costs and sense of logic -- the lowest common denominator.

I've long given up hoping for sanity or change. The only reasonable action now is to get the hell out of the conference.

Me too EG. Been beating this drum forever. I get logistically it's easier having a set sight for the tourney every year. But I'd love for it to go back like it was and give regular season champ homecourt to try an advance to the dance.

 

[EverettGriz]

Doesn’t matter who wins the conference tournament — they are destined to get smoked in the NCAA. So no reason to “protect” the top seed. Just enjoy the conference tournament knowing it’s the pinnacle experience for your team and then hope the winner gets at least a 14 seed.

High bar, but this might be the dumbestass thing I've ever read on eGriz.

Maybe if teams on the enormous *icesheet of mediocrity would improve their programs, the bsc wouldn't always get stuck with a shitty seed. But again, I realize that's not the bsc way, where the goal isn't to be good, it's to do everything to support those who suck.


*GrizFan-24

 

[Griz til I die]

High bar, but this might be the dumbestass thing I've ever read on eGriz.

Maybe if teams on the enormous *icesheet of mediocrity would improve their programs, the bsc wouldn't always get stuck with a shitty seed. But again, I realize that's not the bsc way, where the goal isn't to be good, it's to do everything to support those who suck.


*GrizFan-24

What the Big Sky needs is the top half of the league to all be pushing for 20 regular season wins. UNC just accomplished that last night and the Griz can do it with a win tomorrow, but those are the only 2 that are gonna get to 20 wins in the regular season. If we had 4-5 teams pushing for 20 then the Big Sky's NET would probably be in the mid teens and we'd be looking at a 12 or 13 for the top team.

 

[Sport]

N

High bar, but this might be the dumbestass thing I've ever read on eGriz.

Maybe if teams on the enormous *icesheet of mediocrity would improve their programs, the bsc wouldn't always get stuck with a shitty seed. But again, I realize that's not the bsc way, where the goal isn't to be good, it's to do everything to support those who suck.


*GrizFan-24

i realize it might be a stretch but by having the #1 seed play on their own floor, assuming their successful in the tournament, then the chances of a higher seed become more realistic. The BSC is flirting with having to do a play in game which decreases our chances of getting anything other than a 16 seed.
I realize there’s the issue of selection Sunday but scheduling can be adjusted to accommodate that.

 

[EverettGriz]

What the Big Sky needs is the top half of the league to all be pushing for 20 regular season wins. UNC just accomplished that last night and the Griz can do it with a win tomorrow, but those are the only 2 that are gonna get to 20 wins in the regular season. If we had 4-5 teams pushing for 20 then the Big Sky's NET would probably be in the mid teens and we'd be looking at a 12 or 13 for the top team.

Remember a handful of years back the bsc was going to "punish" teams who didn't schedule well and always had RPIs in the 300s? Yeah, that lasted about a year, because teams bitched and of course the league capitulated to the bottom.

Look, I get budget issues are a concern for some of these programs. But let's be honest: in that case they simply do not deserve to be a DI programs. And the bsc should be doing all they can to ensure that they get their league at least on par with the WAC. Hell, the Big West is the 12th strongest conference in the nation. No reason the bsc couldn't be at that level if they had real leadership.

 

[Griz til I die]

Remember a handful of years back the bsc was going to "punish" teams who didn't schedule well and always had RPIs in the 300s? Yeah, that lasted about a year, because teams bitched and of course the league capitulated to the bottom.

Look, I get budget issues are a concern for some of these programs. But let's be honest: in that case they simply do not deserve to be a DI programs. And the bsc should be doing all they can to ensure that they get their league at least on par with the WAC. Hell, the Big West is the 12th strongest conference in the nation. No reason the bsc couldn't be at that level if they had real leadership.

NAU is the perfect example of that. Look at how soft their non-conference schedule was. It led to an inflated 9-4 record but by the time league play rolled around they've fallen flat on their face.

The Big West is having an absurdly good year, they're usually not this good so kudos to them on a great year. The WAC actually looks a lot like the Big Sky, outside of GCU and Utah Valley everybody else sucks. Utah Valley is projected as a 14 seed right now but may get punished after it took OT for them to beat 6-20 Utah Tech last night by 2. If Sac State leaves the Big Sky, the Big Sky should try and go after Utah Valley or Cal Baptist as the WAC appears well on it's way to crumbling under it's own weight. GCU is goin to the MWC, Seattle is going to the WCC and that's only gonna leave the WAC with 7 members. I'd go get UVU or CBU if I'm Tom Wistrcill.

 

[MSU01]

N

i realize it might be a stretch but by having the #1 seed play on their own floor, assuming their successful in the tournament, then the chances of a higher seed become more realistic. The BSC is flirting with having to do a play in game which decreases our chances of getting anything other than a 16 seed.
I realize there’s the issue of selection Sunday but scheduling can be adjusted to accommodate that.

Interestingly enough I'm not sure if the neutral site tournament has really made all that much of a difference in terms of the #1 seed making the NCAA Tournament less often. Going back to 2000, the Big Sky Champions and their tournament seeds were:

Campus Site Tournaments
2000: NAU (#3 seed)
2001: CS-Northridge (#1 seed)
2002: UM (#4 seed)
2003: Weber (#1 seed)
2004: EWU (#1 seed)
2005: UM (#3 seed)
2006: UM (#2 seed)
2007: Weber (#1 seed)
2008: PSU (#1 seed)
2009: PSU (#2 seed)
2010: UM (#4 seed)
2011: UNC (#1 seed)
2012: UM (#1 seed)
2013: UM (#1 seed)
2014: Weber (#1 seed)
2015: EWU (#2 seed)

Neutral Site Tournaments
2016: Weber (#1 seed)
2017: UND (#1 seed)
2018: UM (#1 seed)
2019: UM (#1 seed)
2021: EWU (#2 seed)
2022: MSU (#1 seed)
2023: MSU (#2 seed)
2024: MSU (#5 seed)

So the #1 seed won 9 of 16 (56.25%) of tournaments played on home court sites since 2000, and the #1 seed has won 5 of 8 (62.5%) of tournaments played so far on the neutral court sites. The lowest seed to win the tournament did come from the neutral site tournament format although two #4 seeds won campus site tournaments.

 

[Grizfan-24]

Montana has probably the two best non-conference wins in the league this year (both at home) against SDSU and CSN (at least via the NET rankings), and right now own the only Quad 2 victory (over NC in Greely).

You can schedule up, but the NET ranking isn't going to change for the conference until they actually start winning some of those games. Back as far as 2021 season, the BSC was nearly winless against D1 opponents in November and December. This year they have just a handful of wins against top 10 conferences (MW and WCC bottom feeders).

The BSC is 0-19 against Quad 1 teams this year, and 1-26 against quad 2 teams (at this moment).

Biggest Wins for each team in the non-conference slate:

• Montana: South Dakota State (106), Cal State Northridge (100) -- Quad 3 wins at home..
• Northern Colorado: South Dakota State (106)-- Quad 3 win at home...
• Montana State: Omaha (195)
• Portland State: Wofford (148)
• Idaho State: Oral Roberts (333)
• Idaho: UC Riverside (136)
• Eastern Washington: Seattle (172)
• Northern Arizona: South Dakota (232)
• Weber State: Pepperdine (243)
• Sacramento State: Air Force (319)

That is going to result in the low to mid 20's ranking the BSC has had.

 

[Sport]

Interestingly enough I'm not sure if the neutral site tournament has really made all that much of a difference in terms of the #1 seed making the NCAA Tournament less often. Going back to 2000, the Big Sky Champions and their tournament seeds were:

Campus Site Tournaments
2000: NAU (#3 seed)
2001: CS-Northridge (#1 seed)
2002: UM (#4 seed)
2003: Weber (#1 seed)
2004: EWU (#1 seed)
2005: UM (#3 seed)
2006: UM (#2 seed)
2007: Weber (#1 seed)
2008: PSU (#1 seed)
2009: PSU (#2 seed)
2010: UM (#4 seed)
2011: UNC (#1 seed)
2012: UM (#1 seed)
2013: UM (#1 seed)
2014: Weber (#1 seed)
2015: EWU (#2 seed)

Neutral Site Tournaments
2016: Weber (#1 seed)
2017: UND (#1 seed)
2018: UM (#1 seed)
2019: UM (#1 seed)
2021: EWU (#2 seed)
2022: MSU (#1 seed)
2023: MSU (#2 seed)
2024: MSU (#5 seed)

So the #1 seed won 9 of 16 (56.25%) of tournaments played on home court sites since 2000, and the #1 seed has won 5 of 8 (62.5%) of tournaments played so far on the neutral court sites. The lowest seed to win the tournament did come from the neutral site tournament format although two #4 seeds won campus site tournaments.

Good homework MSU01. Nice to finally see an intelligent post from the little brothers East of Missoula.

 

[Sport]

I haven’t thought this all the way through but I’ll throw it out for discussion. We all know the BSC Tournament is in Boise. Has been for several years now and they do a pretty good job. The one thing lacking, through no fault of the hosts, is attendance for the games. Not to change the tournament site but to change the Championship Game? And the same for the ladies.
Just an example, say the Griz and Portland State end up in the Championship game. Instead of playing the game Saturday night in Boise play it in the team with the best record in their arena on the following Monday night? Crowds would obviously be better and having it on Monday night we could possibly get a better TV deal and it would give the conference better exposure.
One reason the Championship is held in a predetermined site like Boise is it’s easier and cheaper for hotels, airfare etc. Now it only impacting one team and their fan base. Example if it was held in Missoula, Dahlberg arena would sell out and we could do a revenue share to offset the opposing teams airfare. For a championship game the diehard fans would most likely absorb the added cost to travel. Imagine if last years Championship game between the cats and the Griz were held in Missoula? Most likely the Griz would have won and the better/best team would have gone onto the NCAA tournament.
Looking for reasons why this wouldn’t work?

 

[AZGrizFan]

Doesn’t matter who wins the conference tournament — they are destined to get smoked in the NCAA. So no reason to “protect” the top seed. Just enjoy the conference tournament knowing it’s the pinnacle experience for your team and then hope the winner gets at least a 14 seed.

Sounds like loser talk to me.

 

[Sport]

I suggested this back on February 21st and with the current discussion around selecting tournament site selection I still think this has validity.
My suggestion was to continue to host the tournament in Boise but move the championship game to the site of one of final two teams with the highest ranking on the Monday night following the conference tournament. Example, let’s say the finals this year is between NCU and Montana. NCU with the higher seed would hold the game in Greeley, unpopular by many, but it would give both teams an extra 2 days to prepare without having to play 3 games in 4 days. Mondays are slow days in sports so most arenas would be available, plus it would create an opportunity for ESPN2 to be the only game in town which would create a greater exposure for the teams and conference.
This year’s tournament ends on a Wednesday the 12th. Selection Sunday falls on the 16th so not an issue with timing for Selection Sunday.
Another benefit would be attendance. Instead of a half full arena in Boise if the championship were to be held in Greeley or Missoula the arenas would be rocking. Another benefit for the conference. Not always guaranteed but with sold out arenas, and an extra two days rest the product on the floor would be better as well.
I can’t see why this wouldn’t be a win/win for everybody? The BSC needs greater exposure. We’re on the verge of, if not this year probably next of losing our auto seeding in the tournament and have to play a play-in game. We haven’t won a game since the early 2000’s win over Nevada.
I’d like to hear from posters who don’t agree with this arrangement.