Big Sky Tournament headed to Reno

[wsucatfan]

I hope to hear some Weber State fans comment on their thoughts of this.

How did this work pretty well before when the BSC have a predetermined site? Give it the benefit of your doubts, at the very least.

Last time the tournament was at a "neutral"/prearranged location. 1994 in Boise. Fifth seeded Boise State represented the Sky at the Dance. #1 seed Weber State, lost in the first round to Boise, and went home early. The BSC change back to the reg. champ hosting and in 1995 Weber hosted and won the next year and beat Michigan State, and lost to Georgetown on a last second circus shot off a miss by Allen Iverson.

We think it sucks. If multiple bids were given to the BSC then this would be a different story. It's bad enough when the BCS champion gets pounded in the first round but it's only a matter of time until a lower seed gets hot for 3 days and takes the tournament championship and really gets drilled in the NCAA tournament. The best regular season team should have the opportunity to host. Inviting all 12 teams is a joke as well, really do we need two 7 win teams (ISU, MSU) attending. Or even better in 2013 SUU was 2-27, this isn't a city recreation league where everyone gets a prize, but it sure seems like it is being ran like one.

http://www.bigskyfans.com/wildcats/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=5024
http://www.bigskyfans.com/wildcats/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=5020

 

[EverettGriz]

You think they will find a conference that doesn't let all the teams participate in the tournament?

No I don't. But they will find a conference that isn't a one-bid league. And that's the TOTAL difference. I'd be perfectly fine with 4-27 PSU with an RPI of 341 playing in the conf tournament if winning it didn't mean EVERYthing, which is completely true in multi-bid conferences.

 

[EverettGriz]

I hope to hear some Weber State fans comment on their thoughts of this.

How did this work pretty well before when the BSC have a predetermined site? Give it the benefit of your doubts, at the very least.

Last time the tournament was at a "neutral"/prearranged location. 1994 in Boise. Fifth seeded Boise State represented the Sky at the Dance. #1 seed Weber State, lost in the first round to Boise, and went home early. The BSC change back to the reg. champ hosting and in 1995 Weber hosted and won the next year and beat Michigan State, and lost to Georgetown on a last second circus shot off a miss by Allen Iverson.

We think it sucks. If multiple bids were given to the BSC then this would be a different story. It's bad enough when the BCS champion gets pounded in the first round but it's only a matter of time until a lower seed gets hot for 3 days and takes the tournament championship and really gets drilled in the NCAA tournament. The best regular season team should have the opportunity to host. Inviting all 12 teams is a joke as well, really do we need two 7 win teams (ISU, MSU) attending. Or even better in 2013 SUU was 2-27, this isn't a city recreation league where everyone gets a prize, but it sure seems like it is being ran like one.

http://www.bigskyfans.com/wildcats/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=5024
http://www.bigskyfans.com/wildcats/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=5020

Intelligent basketball fans get it.

 

[SDHornet]

Generally I like this move. This solves the logistics issue surrounding the old format, reduces costs for the teams, and allows fans to make travel plans to attend well in advance. I don’t like all 12/24 teams getting in (top 8 seemed fine to me). Personally I thought Spokane had the logistical advantage (about half the conference within driving distance) but Reno has to wherewithal to throw cheap hotel rooms at the BSC to get the bid and that’s just how things go.

Good entertainment reading this thread. I got a good laugh from those who bitch about the BSC being a small backwater conference, but then turn around and bitch when the BSC brass makes a move to allow the conference to be more in-line with what the “big boys” do for their conference tourney. See you in Reno folks.
:thumb:

 

[mtgrizrule]

As for the number of teams for the conference tournament, I have always been an advocate of any team having a less than .500 record in conference play is ineligible for the NCAA tournament. Conferences could allow those teams to play in the conference tournament, but if sub .500 conference team won the conference tournament, the bid would default to the conference winner, or the conference loses 1 bid to the big dance.

Meaning if a 1 bid conference has a sub .500 conference team win the conference tournament then that conference would have nobody representing in the NCAA. For multi bid conferences, they would lose 1 bid. Meaning, if the PAC 12 would have 5 teams projected to go dancing, in this case it would be 4, if a sub .500 conference record team won their conference tournament.

This would be very fair to all conferences, and would encourage all conferences to have formats favorable to the better teams in the conference. As for the Big Sky, it would definitely put an emphasis on winning the conference regular season, if the conference winner would be the default team going to the NCAA tournament, if a sub .500 team won the conference tournament.

Sorry, if a team is not good enough to win over 50% of their conference games, they have not earned the right to go dancing. The participation award attitude drives me crazy at every level of athletics, HS and beyond. Yes, in that regard, I completely agree with EverettGriz.

Great to have Weber State and Sac State fans weighing in.

 

[sacstateman]

I hope to hear some Weber State fans comment on their thoughts of this.

How did this work pretty well before when the BSC have a predetermined site? Give it the benefit of your doubts, at the very least.

Last time the tournament was at a "neutral"/prearranged location. 1994 in Boise. Fifth seeded Boise State represented the Sky at the Dance. #1 seed Weber State, lost in the first round to Boise, and went home early. The BSC change back to the reg. champ hosting and in 1995 Weber hosted and won the next year and beat Michigan State, and lost to Georgetown on a last second circus shot off a miss by Allen Iverson.

We think it sucks. If multiple bids were given to the BSC then this would be a different story. It's bad enough when the BCS champion gets pounded in the first round but it's only a matter of time until a lower seed gets hot for 3 days and takes the tournament championship and really gets drilled in the NCAA tournament. The best regular season team should have the opportunity to host. Inviting all 12 teams is a joke as well, really do we need two 7 win teams (ISU, MSU) attending. Or even better in 2013 SUU was 2-27, this isn't a city recreation league where everyone gets a prize, but it sure seems like it is being ran like one.

http://www.bigskyfans.com/wildcats/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=5024
http://www.bigskyfans.com/wildcats/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=5020

Your example doesn't prove anything because the tournament was held in Boise....not a neutral court situation at all...if all teams are not going to the tournament then it negates the ability of teams to make arrangements early...it is that simple...if only 8 teams make the tourney NO ONE can make arrangements today, they all have to wait till the end of the regular season. If all 12 are in they can all make arrangements TODAY...can we stop beating this horse to death...in 3 years make your pitch...it is too late now...

 

[grizindabox]

I hope to hear some Weber State fans comment on their thoughts of this.

How did this work pretty well before when the BSC have a predetermined site? Give it the benefit of your doubts, at the very least.

Last time the tournament was at a "neutral"/prearranged location. 1994 in Boise. Fifth seeded Boise State represented the Sky at the Dance. #1 seed Weber State, lost in the first round to Boise, and went home early. The BSC change back to the reg. champ hosting and in 1995 Weber hosted and won the next year and beat Michigan State, and lost to Georgetown on a last second circus shot off a miss by Allen Iverson.

We think it sucks. If multiple bids were given to the BSC then this would be a different story. It's bad enough when the BCS champion gets pounded in the first round but it's only a matter of time until a lower seed gets hot for 3 days and takes the tournament championship and really gets drilled in the NCAA tournament. The best regular season team should have the opportunity to host. Inviting all 12 teams is a joke as well, really do we need two 7 win teams (ISU, MSU) attending. Or even better in 2013 SUU was 2-27, this isn't a city recreation league where everyone gets a prize, but it sure seems like it is being ran like one.

http://www.bigskyfans.com/wildcats/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=5024
http://www.bigskyfans.com/wildcats/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=5020

Not much "NEUTRAL" about Boise St winning in Boise

 

[SWeberCat02]

Everyone's so worried about who represents the conference in the NCAA tournament. I have mixed feelings. While I do think the best team should get the bid, I've also lost most interest and excitement for the conference rep in the NCAA tourney the past several years. The conference is so bad anymore that it really doesn't matter much who gets the bid. They will almost certainly always lose, and usually by a wide margin. The NCAA tournament is getting less and less about the small schools, and the gap between the big and small schools is getting bigger. The days of the conference rep winning a tournament game more than once a decade or two are gone.

 

[mtgrizrule]

Everyone's so worried about who represents the conference in the NCAA tournament. I have mixed feelings. While I do think the best team should get the bid, I've also lost most interest and excitement for the conference rep in the NCAA tourney the past several years. The conference is so bad anymore that it really doesn't matter much who gets the bid. They will almost certainly always lose, and usually by a wide margin. The NCAA tournament is getting less and less about the small schools, and the gap between the big and small schools is getting bigger. The days of the conference rep winning a tournament game more than once a decade or two are gone.

It certainly looks that way. Hell, the GRIZ beat Nevada when LK was still head coach here. :thumb:

 

[WSUWALDO]

Ugh...this new format is awful. It totally makes the regular season irrelevant. Cuts out the fans and takes almost every advantage the regular season champ had away. Of course Sac fans love this. It ensures their team gets to go to the tournament every year. Something that Sac fans rarely get to enjoy.

Whats the purpose of winning the Big Sky? Having a bye or two doesn't exactly give you an advantage. You still have to play away from your fans, on a floor you aren't use to, and have to travel. For athletes, it is far easier staying comfortable and rested in your own surroundings.

If the Sky has to have a tournament, there should be established advantages for the regular season champ. Most importantly they should always host the tournament giving them the most advantage. I don't care what the PAC-12 or MW are doing because the regular season champ in those leagues will always get an at-large bid into the Dance. Remember the Big Sky is a 1-bid conference full of plus 300 RPI teams. Really, the best option is save money that would be spent on the tournament and use it to play every conference team twice. Best record takes the conference bid to the dance.

 

[SWeberCat02]

Having a bye or two doesn't exactly give you an advantage.

Having a bye or two absolutely gives you an advantage. Very unlikely that a team, especially a lower seeded team, is going to win 4 or 5 games in a row on 4 or 5 consecutive days. The very fact that you have to win one or two less games to win the tournament is a big advantage.

Really, the best option is save money that would be spent on the tournament and use it to play every conference team twice. Best record takes the conference bid to the dance.

I agree 100%.

 

[EverettGriz]

Having a bye or two absolutely gives you an advantage

But the top 4 teams receive a bye. Hell, in the bsc, the 4th place team could be 11-22 with an RPI of 335.

Waldo is correct as many on here have stated before. In a one-bid league, you must do all you can to protect your best team in an effort to get them to the Dance. Athletics ain't about being "fair"; it's about being the best and giving your conference the best opportunity in the NCAA Tournament.

 

[HelenaHandBasket]

Having a bye or two absolutely gives you an advantage

But the top 4 teams receive a bye. Hell, in the bsc, the 4th place team could be 11-22 with an RPI of 335.

Waldo is correct as many on here have stated before. In a one-bid league, you must do all you can to protect your best team in an effort to get them to the Dance. Athletics ain't about being "fair"; it's about being the best and giving your conference the best opportunity in the NCAA Tournament.

Funny, the BSC team that gave the conference the best opportunity in the NCAA Tournament this last season didn't even host the Conference Tournament, but found a way to win it. (And don't try to convince me that EWU wasn't the better team)

 

[SWeberCat02]

Having a bye or two absolutely gives you an advantage

But the top 4 teams receive a bye. Hell, in the bsc, the 4th place team could be 11-22 with an RPI of 335.

Waldo is correct as many on here have stated before. In a one-bid league, you must do all you can to protect your best team in an effort to get them to the Dance. Athletics ain't about being "fair"; it's about being the best and giving your conference the best opportunity in the NCAA Tournament.

Right, it's an advantage to the teams that get byes. Actually, if I'm correct, at least 8 teams will get at least 1 bye. Not saying I like all teams getting invited, just saying that a bye is an advantage.

 

[griz8791]

I'm sorry the coaches and ADs were so stressed by the logistics of having to make tournament travel arrangements on short notice. Abandoning the conference tournament would have been a better and cheaper way of sparing them that stress.

 

[HelenaHandBasket]

Having a bye or two absolutely gives you an advantage

But the top 4 teams receive a bye. Hell, in the bsc, the 4th place team could be 11-22 with an RPI of 335.

Waldo is correct as many on here have stated before. In a one-bid league, you must do all you can to protect your best team in an effort to get them to the Dance. Athletics ain't about being "fair"; it's about being the best and giving your conference the best opportunity in the NCAA Tournament.

Right, it's an advantage to the teams that get byes. Actually, if I'm correct, at least 8 teams will get at least 1 bye. Not saying I like all teams getting invited, just saying that a bye is an advantage.

My understanding is the top 4 get a first round bye

 

[WSUnPurple]

How does this work for other small to mid sized conferences with neutral sites? How did this work pretty well before when the BSC have a predetermined site? Give it the benefit of your doubts, at the very least.

It takes the event away from fans and puts in a sterile environment while simultaneously cheapening the regular season. It's a penny-pinching move that hurts fans so there's not much leeway for benefit of the doubt.

If the league absolutely must have more notice for travel here are 3 options that I'd prefer:
1) The right to host goes to the regular season champs of the previous year. Keeps regular season meaningful but allows travel time. Makes it more likely that a host loses early but would be fine most years.
2) Conference schedule starts as a round-robin, winner of the 11 game round-robin hosts tournament that year. This year we played out 11th BSC game Feb 7, tourney started March 12. Less travel time with this option but more likely that the best team hosts. Would solve some of this issues with the current unbalanced schedule but it would be weird to reward teams in early February.
3) Just give the bid to the regular season champ. Ensures 18 meaningful games and rewards the best team. No additional costs for teams and ensures good seeding in the NCAA. Obviously it's nice to have the season end with a tournament where a team can get hot and win it but what good is that tournament if no fans go?

Great post dp!

The excitement of the regular season is all but lost on me. Reno is such a 3rd rate town. Fitting for a 3rd rate conference, I guess. Everything about this is so horribly wrong, it would be laughable if it wasn't going to be so sad. Looking back, the best conference tournaments were probably when 3rd & 4th seeds got to host Round 1 of the tourney, and the winners got to meet 1st, and 2nd seeds @ the Host's site. Three teams traveling stopped the schools bitching about lack of accommodations, and travel logistics were only "burdened" on 3 schools. Foolertons grandiose expansion foibles was the undoing of what was certainly the best part of Big Sky basketball. Reno of all places :roll: I've been there a half dozen times over the last 3 years. It is truly nasty, and depressing.

 

['68griz]

How does this work for other small to mid sized conferences with neutral sites? How did this work pretty well before when the BSC have a predetermined site? Give it the benefit of your doubts, at the very least.

It takes the event away from fans and puts in a sterile environment while simultaneously cheapening the regular season. It's a penny-pinching move that hurts fans so there's not much leeway for benefit of the doubt.

If the league absolutely must have more notice for travel here are 3 options that I'd prefer:
1) The right to host goes to the regular season champs of the previous year. Keeps regular season meaningful but allows travel time. Makes it more likely that a host loses early but would be fine most years.
2) Conference schedule starts as a round-robin, winner of the 11 game round-robin hosts tournament that year. This year we played out 11th BSC game Feb 7, tourney started March 12. Less travel time with this option but more likely that the best team hosts. Would solve some of this issues with the current unbalanced schedule but it would be weird to reward teams in early February.
3) Just give the bid to the regular season champ. Ensures 18 meaningful games and rewards the best team. No additional costs for teams and ensures good seeding in the NCAA. Obviously it's nice to have the season end with a tournament where a team can get hot and win it but what good is that tournament if no fans go?

Great post dp!

The excitement of the regular season is all but lost on me. Reno is such a 3rd rate town. Fitting for a 3rd rate conference, I guess. Everything about this is so horribly wrong, it would be laughable if it wasn't going to be so sad. Looking back, the best conference tournaments were probably when 3rd & 4th seeds got to host Round 1 of the tourney, and the winners got to meet 1st, and 2nd seeds @ the Host's site. Three teams traveling stopped the schools bitching about lack of accommodations, and travel logistics were only "burdened" on 3 schools. Foolertons grandiose expansion foibles was the undoing of what was certainly the best part of Big Sky basketball. Reno of all places :roll: I've been there a half dozen times over the last 3 years. It is truly nasty, and depressing.

+1

 

[GrizLA]

How does this work for other small to mid sized conferences with neutral sites? How did this work pretty well before when the BSC have a predetermined site? Give it the benefit of your doubts, at the very least.

It takes the event away from fans and puts in a sterile environment while simultaneously cheapening the regular season. It's a penny-pinching move that hurts fans so there's not much leeway for benefit of the doubt.

If the league absolutely must have more notice for travel here are 3 options that I'd prefer:
1) The right to host goes to the regular season champs of the previous year. Keeps regular season meaningful but allows travel time. Makes it more likely that a host loses early but would be fine most years.
2) Conference schedule starts as a round-robin, winner of the 11 game round-robin hosts tournament that year. This year we played out 11th BSC game Feb 7, tourney started March 12. Less travel time with this option but more likely that the best team hosts. Would solve some of this issues with the current unbalanced schedule but it would be weird to reward teams in early February.
3) Just give the bid to the regular season champ. Ensures 18 meaningful games and rewards the best team. No additional costs for teams and ensures good seeding in the NCAA. Obviously it's nice to have the season end with a tournament where a team can get hot and win it but what good is that tournament if no fans go?

Great post dp!

The excitement of the regular season is all but lost on me. Reno is such a 3rd rate town. Fitting for a 3rd rate conference, I guess. Everything about this is so horribly wrong, it would be laughable if it wasn't going to be so sad. Looking back, the best conference tournaments were probably when 3rd & 4th seeds got to host Round 1 of the tourney, and the winners got to meet 1st, and 2nd seeds @ the Host's site. Three teams traveling stopped the schools bitching about lack of accommodations, and travel logistics were only "burdened" on 3 schools. Foolertons grandiose expansion foibles was the undoing of what was certainly the best part of Big Sky basketball. Reno of all places :roll: I've been there a half dozen times over the last 3 years. It is truly nasty, and depressing.

Reno beats anything and everything in "Deseret"!

 

[SWeberCat02]

How does this work for other small to mid sized conferences with neutral sites? How did this work pretty well before when the BSC have a predetermined site? Give it the benefit of your doubts, at the very least.

It takes the event away from fans and puts in a sterile environment while simultaneously cheapening the regular season. It's a penny-pinching move that hurts fans so there's not much leeway for benefit of the doubt.

If the league absolutely must have more notice for travel here are 3 options that I'd prefer:
1) The right to host goes to the regular season champs of the previous year. Keeps regular season meaningful but allows travel time. Makes it more likely that a host loses early but would be fine most years.
2) Conference schedule starts as a round-robin, winner of the 11 game round-robin hosts tournament that year. This year we played out 11th BSC game Feb 7, tourney started March 12. Less travel time with this option but more likely that the best team hosts. Would solve some of this issues with the current unbalanced schedule but it would be weird to reward teams in early February.
3) Just give the bid to the regular season champ. Ensures 18 meaningful games and rewards the best team. No additional costs for teams and ensures good seeding in the NCAA. Obviously it's nice to have the season end with a tournament where a team can get hot and win it but what good is that tournament if no fans go?

Great post dp!

The excitement of the regular season is all but lost on me. Reno is such a 3rd rate town. Fitting for a 3rd rate conference, I guess. Everything about this is so horribly wrong, it would be laughable if it wasn't going to be so sad. Looking back, the best conference tournaments were probably when 3rd & 4th seeds got to host Round 1 of the tourney, and the winners got to meet 1st, and 2nd seeds @ the Host's site. Three teams traveling stopped the schools bitching about lack of accommodations, and travel logistics were only "burdened" on 3 schools. Foolertons grandiose expansion foibles was the undoing of what was certainly the best part of Big Sky basketball. Reno of all places :roll: I've been there a half dozen times over the last 3 years. It is truly nasty, and depressing.

Reno beats anything and everything in "Deseret"!

Actually, Reno would have been in Deseret.