Big Sky Conference (A historical look)

[Grizfan-24]

There has been a lot of conversation lately about who is the flagship program in the Big Sky Conference, be it Weber State or Montana or anyone else. I did some basic simple math from 1980 to the Present and here are the findings:

Big Sky Conference Since 1980-81
Team................ Con.....AVG Finish ..Conf Tit....Tourn. Titles
Boise State............15.........4.5...........2............3
Cal-Northridge.........5..........4.4..........1.............1
Eastern Washington..23.........5.61.........1.............1
Idaho...................16.........4............4.............5
Idaho State............30.........5.7..........0.............1
Montana..............30.........3.37.........3.............7
Montana State........30.........4.77.........3.............2
Nevada................12.........3.42..........1............2
Northern Arizona.....30.........5.37.........4.............2
Northern Colorado.... 4..........5.75........0.............0
Portland State.........14.........4.93........2.............2
Sacramento State.....14.........7.57........0.............0
Weber State..........30.........3.47........9.............4

I could have done the data all the way back to the original year of the conference, but frankly I thought it to be a bit over done. I just wanted to get enough data over the modern era. The math might be a bit off because there were some ties in there that I simply looked at the overall record and determined the tie break.

As dominant as Weber State claims to be, really the interesting data that came from it, they have had more years at the bottom of the conference than the Grizzlies. In fact only Boise State, UNR and the Griz are at least in my rudementary data, the only programs to not have finished last in the conference since 1980. Weber State clearly dominates the conference championship titles, but since the advent of the 6 team conference championship the UofM has won 7 titles (91,92,97,02,05,06,10). I think there is an obvious argument that over the history (back to the orgins) of the conference, it probably bears out that Weber State is the class of the conference. Yet, when completing the data, I was suprised over the past thirty years really how close the race was. In raw data Weber State was just edged out by 3 pts by the UofM.

If UN was still in the conference, they would have a strong argument. In the near decade in the data, Nevada never finished lower 5th from 1981 until they left the conference.

The other 30 year members NAU, ISU, and MSU aren't even close in the conversation. MSU finished 6th or lower 14 times in the 30 years. ISU 15 times 6th and lower and NAU 16 6th and lower, yet only 3 times in the past 15 years.

On the other hand since Sac States entrance in teh conference the have only finished higher than 6th 3 times. But I think we could have come to that conclusion without the data.

Just some data to munch on. Use it as you may.

 

[Gallatin Griz]

Thanks for the stats - very interesting

Go Griz!

Maul'em!

 

[MT Jack]

Grizfan-24 :

Thanks for the info and the effort into putting this together.

Weber State won the conference 9 times. U of M won it 3 times. That tells me that Wildcats were the better team during the season, when it's supposed to count, but the Griz have been the better team over a 4-5 day period encompassing the conference tournament, when it "really" does count.

This leads to the argument over the validity of conference tournaments as to whether conference tournaments are true indicators of a team's overall body of work accomplished or whether they merely serve as a cash cow (well....not the Big Sky tourney) for NCAA college basketball. If the U of Kentucky or Duke flame out today in their tournaments they still earn at least top 3 seeds in the NCAAs. If, say, Siena, UTEP, or Oakland U. were to blow it in their conference tourney, regardless of their 17-1, 15-1 and 17-1 in-conference records, then they're pretty much outta luck NCAA-wise. Same goes in the Big Sky.

The week leading up to the NCAA tournament and the first 4 days of the NCAA tourney are by far my favorite days of the year as a sports fan. The excitement, in my biased opinion, is unparalleled.

That being said - I think the only conference that has it right anymore is the Ivy League for rewarding the team that plays the best overall for the season.

My two cents....nothing more or less.

 

[Grizfan-24]

MT Jack,

Agreed. I personally have never been a fan of conference championships. I hate conference championships for football even more. The Big Sky Conference championship tournament is one of the longest running. I honestly don't mind conference tournaments for basketball, because as we already know the season already matters so little.

Yes weebs has won the conference title 9 times, and there is great legitimacy in that. I was more suprised though honestly they didn't run away with the aggregate number like I would have thought.

On an interesting note, I would make the assertion that over the past nearly 20 years, NAU is easily amongst the conferences best. As long as ISU have been in teh conference, not once over the past 30 years have they won the conference regular season title.

 

[Obzerver]

Some may have heard that there is a strong possibility that expansion of the tourney will happen soon. The driving force is to give more credence to the conference champions allowing them into the tourney as well as the conference tourney champs. They want to make sure the season accounts for something.

 

[Grisly Fan]

Winning the regular season gets you home games and given that home teams win something more than half the time (I couldn't find the exact statistics to support this re: NCAA basketball) plus supposedly being the best team in the league means that you SHOULD be able to seal the deal and win the tourney.

 

[Obzerver]

Many D1 conference tournaments are held at predetermined sites having nothing to do with who won the conference, ergo no advantage to conference champions.

 

[djollieballs]

Many D1 conference tournaments are held at predetermined sites having nothing to do with who won the conference, ergo no advantage to conference champions.

Conferences popular enough to hold off-site tournaments usually send half their teams to the dance anyway.

 

[dbackjon]

Note on NAU/last 15 years.

In the early 90's, NAU had one of the most pathetic programs in DI. Then they hired Ben Howland in 1994. Multiple conference titles followed.

Shows how one coach can turn a program around.

 

[robomomo]

There has been a lot of conversation lately about who is the flagship program in the Big Sky Conference, be it Weber State or Montana or anyone else. I did some basic simple math from 1980 to the Present and here are the findings:

Big Sky Conference Since 1980-81
Team................ Con.....AVG Finish ..Conf Tit....Tourn. Titles
Boise State............15.........4.5...........2............3
Cal-Northridge.........5..........4.4..........1.............1
Eastern Washington..23.........5.61.........1.............1
Idaho...................16.........4............4.............5
Idaho State............30.........5.7..........0.............1
Montana..............30.........3.37.........3.............7
Montana State........30.........4.77.........3.............2
Nevada................12.........3.42..........1............2
Northern Arizona.....30.........5.37.........4.............2
Northern Colorado.... 4..........5.75........0.............0
Portland State.........14.........4.93........2.............2
Sacramento State.....14.........7.57........0.............0
Weber State..........30.........3.47........9.............4

I could have done the data all the way back to the original year of the conference, but frankly I thought it to be a bit over done. I just wanted to get enough data over the modern era. The math might be a bit off because there were some ties in there that I simply looked at the overall record and determined the tie break.

As dominant as Weber State claims to be, really the interesting data that came from it, they have had more years at the bottom of the conference than the Grizzlies. In fact only Boise State, UNR and the Griz are at least in my rudementary data, the only programs to not have finished last in the conference since 1980. Weber State clearly dominates the conference championship titles, but since the advent of the 6 team conference championship the UofM has won 7 titles (91,92,97,02,05,06,10). I think there is an obvious argument that over the history (back to the orgins) of the conference, it probably bears out that Weber State is the class of the conference. Yet, when completing the data, I was suprised over the past thirty years really how close the race was. In raw data Weber State was just edged out by 3 pts by the UofM.

If UN was still in the conference, they would have a strong argument. In the near decade in the data, Nevada never finished lower 5th from 1981 until they left the conference.

The other 30 year members NAU, ISU, and MSU aren't even close in the conversation. MSU finished 6th or lower 14 times in the 30 years. ISU 15 times 6th and lower and NAU 16 6th and lower, yet only 3 times in the past 15 years.

On the other hand since Sac States entrance in teh conference the have only finished higher than 6th 3 times. But I think we could have come to that conclusion without the data.

Just some data to munch on. Use it as you may.

another argument for the grizzlies moving to WAC or mtn west when the pac 10 poaches utah and BYU

 

[cclarkblues]

There has been a lot of conversation lately about who is the flagship program in the Big Sky Conference, be it Weber State or Montana or anyone else. I did some basic simple math from 1980 to the Present and here are the findings:

Big Sky Conference Since 1980-81
Team................ Con.....AVG Finish ..Conf Tit....Tourn. Titles
Boise State............15.........4.5...........2............3
Cal-Northridge.........5..........4.4..........1.............1
Eastern Washington..23.........5.61.........1.............1
Idaho...................16.........4............4.............5
Idaho State............30.........5.7..........0.............1
Montana..............30.........3.37.........3.............7
Montana State........30.........4.77.........3.............2
Nevada................12.........3.42..........1............2
Northern Arizona.....30.........5.37.........4.............2
Northern Colorado.... 4..........5.75........0.............0
Portland State.........14.........4.93........2.............2
Sacramento State.....14.........7.57........0.............0
Weber State..........30.........3.47........9.............4

I could have done the data all the way back to the original year of the conference, but frankly I thought it to be a bit over done. I just wanted to get enough data over the modern era. The math might be a bit off because there were some ties in there that I simply looked at the overall record and determined the tie break.

As dominant as Weber State claims to be, really the interesting data that came from it, they have had more years at the bottom of the conference than the Grizzlies. In fact only Boise State, UNR and the Griz are at least in my rudementary data, the only programs to not have finished last in the conference since 1980. Weber State clearly dominates the conference championship titles, but since the advent of the 6 team conference championship the UofM has won 7 titles (91,92,97,02,05,06,10). I think there is an obvious argument that over the history (back to the orgins) of the conference, it probably bears out that Weber State is the class of the conference. Yet, when completing the data, I was suprised over the past thirty years really how close the race was. In raw data Weber State was just edged out by 3 pts by the UofM.

If UN was still in the conference, they would have a strong argument. In the near decade in the data, Nevada never finished lower 5th from 1981 until they left the conference.

The other 30 year members NAU, ISU, and MSU aren't even close in the conversation. MSU finished 6th or lower 14 times in the 30 years. ISU 15 times 6th and lower and NAU 16 6th and lower, yet only 3 times in the past 15 years.

On the other hand since Sac States entrance in teh conference the have only finished higher than 6th 3 times. But I think we could have come to that conclusion without the data.

Just some data to munch on. Use it as you may.

I am totally impressed with the way you managed to get your colums to line up. I can't read most of the charts on the forums because they are all jumbled up. Kudos.

 

[Grizfan-24]

Actually I previewed it.. And hated that it just what you described. So I painstakingly put periods between the data so it would line up. Nothing special there. Tedious to say the least.

 

[cclarkblues]

Actually I previewed it.. And hated that it just what you described. So I painstakingly put periods between the data so it would line up. Nothing special there. Tedious to say the least.

You would think there would be a way to tab the columns so that they line up. Well, just wanted to thank you for your effort.

 

[GrizBBIsKing]

Many D1 conference tournaments are held at predetermined sites having nothing to do with who won the conference, ergo no advantage to conference champions.

Big Sky held a conference tournament at a predetermined site once. The 1990 tournament was hosted by Boise State. Boise State didn't even qualify for the tournament that they hosted.

 

[GrizLA]

Grizfan-24 :

Thanks for the info and the effort into putting this together.

Weber State won the conference 9 times. U of M won it 3 times. That tells me that Wildcats were the better team during the season, when it's supposed to count, but the Griz have been the better team over a 4-5 day period encompassing the conference tournament, when it "really" does count.

This leads to the argument over the validity of conference tournaments as to whether conference tournaments are true indicators of a team's overall body of work accomplished or whether they merely serve as a cash cow (well....not the Big Sky tourney) for NCAA college basketball. If the U of Kentucky or Duke flame out today in their tournaments they still earn at least top 3 seeds in the NCAAs. If, say, Siena, UTEP, or Oakland U. were to blow it in their conference tourney, regardless of their 17-1, 15-1 and 17-1 in-conference records, then they're pretty much outta luck NCAA-wise. Same goes in the Big Sky.

The week leading up to the NCAA tournament and the first 4 days of the NCAA tourney are by far my favorite days of the year as a sports fan. The excitement, in my biased opinion, is unparalleled.

That being said - I think the only conference that has it right anymore is the Ivy League for rewarding the team that plays the best overall for the season.

My two cents....nothing more or less.

Actually, another way to look at it is what many already do...the NCAA tourney really starts with the tournaments....it is the "qualifying" or play in and it highly entertaining....so, in effect, the Griz have won game one of the tourney....and Weber is out...

 

[MT Jack]

Actually, another way to look at it is what many already do...the NCAA tourney really starts with the tournaments....it is the "qualifying" or play in and it highly entertaining....so, in effect, the Griz have won game one of the tourney....and Weber is out...[/quote]

No debate here in regards to this week being highly entertaining. Best two week period in all college sports.

My only issue is that conference tournaments certainly don't count as "qualifying" games for the SEC/Big 10/ACC/Big East and other such big-boy conferences. Their NCAA tournament doesn't start til next Thursday or Friday. Many of these teams have the ability to fall flat on their faces in the opening round or quarterfinals vs. inferior opponents with no fear of a lost NCAA bid.

I know I'm pissing in the wind here but the inequities aggravate me.

 

[stubbins]

Put everybody in, rank em by rpi and let the chips fall where they may...if a big sky team could get a good draw based on rpi, and not some board who thinks that they are a 15 or 16 seed, they might be able to make a run to the final 32 once in a while. That would be 4 games in instead of 2...but if things lined up, who knows.

 

[citygriz]

another measure is performance in the ncaa tournament itself. and historically, to the best of my knowledge, only two teams have got past the first round--weber v. north carolina, and montana twice, v. utah state in 1975, and v. nevada in 2006. (weber may have won a first-rounder back in the pre-historic dick motta days, i don't remember.) you punch your ticket in the big sky tournament, but you redeem your ticket at the big dance since each victory is worth big bucks to the conference.

 

[ISUguy]

I know it's been a long dry spell for the Bengals, but I have to make a couple of historical corrections just to keep the record straight. ISU tied with Weber State in 1994 for the Big Sky regular season championship. And ISU has advanced farther in the NCAA tournament than any other Big Sky team, reaching the Elite Eight in 1977. (When you have so few successful moments, you have to defend them.

 

[GrizLA]

I know it's been a long dry spell for the Bengals, but I have to make a couple of historical corrections just to keep the record straight. ISU tied with Weber State in 1994 for the Big Sky regular season championship. And ISU has advanced farther in the NCAA tournament than any other Big Sky team, reaching the Elite Eight in 1977. (When you have so few successful moments, you have to defend them.

I remember watching that UCLA game with the crowds yelling "Idaho State" over and over....Wooden returned to LA and said he had seen nothing like that....it was the high point for the Big Sky so far, sad to say...