BSC Tournament

[HelenaHandBasket]

Wow, ummm, well how about we start with an answer any 5 year old could provide: less time to recover from the travel. Then we have the fact that the GRIZ don't play noon games, like, ever (except for that bullshit at suu). Then there's the fact that noon pretty darn early in the biological clock of 19 year olds then there's the fact it's difficult to play in front of NO ONE with no atmosphere

I could go on and on, but I'm still not sure you were serious in asking, sooooo....

You do realize the other team is in the same boat. It also allows the team more time to recover prior to the next game. And I think the recover from travel is laughable since they will have 2 more days off and travel, by plane the day prior. And the atmosphere will suck whether they play at noon or 8. So many f***[*] crybabies

Did the other team dominate all season therefore deserving the best chance to get to the big Dance?

If that is the case, they should not have a tournament at all. But in the case of a 12 team tournament at a neutral site, yes, they do have the best chance by design. You do realize that the 12 BSC schools agreed to this format because it was the best format for them...right. No matter what you argue, the driving force behind it is the least expensive format that includes all schools. You might not like it, but it is what a majority of the schools wanted.

 

[garizzalies]

I don’t get the argument that a tourney doesn’t crown the best team in the league. Makes no sense to me at all. The whole point of the league tourney is to figure out who is playing the best RIGHT NOW, not weeks or months ago. Who gives a shit what the stat sheets say, settle it on the court like it should be. Also, the big dance is a stressful tourney at a neutral site. If you can’t win your own tourney, why would you be the best prepared for the big one?
So dumb. Really the participation trophy folks have gone overboard

 

[Mousegriz]

Just go win it Griz! There are likely to be a couple complete battles and it won't be easy to get to the NCAA's. Is it supposed to be? Regular season champ has had to win a conference tourney of some type for almost 40 years.

Good luck Griz, don't make excuses or whine about the BSC tourney format or location. Go play three good games and let the chips fall where they may!

 

[EverettGriz]

I don’t get the argument that a tourney doesn’t crown the best team in the league. Makes no sense to me at all. The whole point of the league tourney is to figure out who is playing the best RIGHT NOW, not weeks or months ago. Who gives a shit what the stat sheets say, settle it on the court like it should be. Also, the big dance is a stressful tourney at a neutral site. If you can’t win your own tourney, why would you be the best prepared for the big one?
So dumb. Really the participation trophy folks have gone overboard

So you're suggesting Duke shouldn't go to the Dance if they don't win the ACC tournament?

 

[garizzalies]

Yea that’s exactly what I’m saying you dumb fucking strawman

 

[BadlandsGrizFan]

Wow, ummm, well how about we start with an answer any 5 year old could provide: less time to recover from the travel. Then we have the fact that the GRIZ don't play noon games, like, ever (except for that bullshit at suu). Then there's the fact that noon pretty darn early in the biological clock of 19 year olds then there's the fact it's difficult to play in front of NO ONE with no atmosphere

I could go on and on, but I'm still not sure you were serious in asking, sooooo....

You do realize the other team is in the same boat. It also allows the team more time to recover prior to the next game. And I think the recover from travel is laughable since they will have 2 more days off and travel, by plane the day prior. And the atmosphere will suck whether they play at noon or 8. So many f***[*] crybabies

Did the other team dominate all season therefore deserving the best chance to get to the big Dance?

If that is the case, they should not have a tournament at all. But in the case of a 12 team tournament at a neutral site, yes, they do have the best chance by design. You do realize that the 12 BSC schools agreed to this format because it was the best format for them...right. No matter what you argue, the driving force behind it is the least expensive format that includes all schools. You might not like it, but it is what a majority of the schools wanted.

I think its what 9 or 10 of the Big Sky schools wanted. I guarantee its not what Weber or Montana wanted, and its another example of the BigSky conference turning its back on its bell cows and catering to the little guys that do nothing to push the Big Skys appearance.

 

[BadlandsGrizFan]

I don’t get the argument that a tourney doesn’t crown the best team in the league. Makes no sense to me at all. The whole point of the league tourney is to figure out who is playing the best RIGHT NOW, not weeks or months ago. Who gives a shit what the stat sheets say, settle it on the court like it should be. Also, the big dance is a stressful tourney at a neutral site. If you can’t win your own tourney, why would you be the best prepared for the big one?
So dumb. Really the participation trophy folks have gone overboard

So you're suggesting Duke shouldn't go to the Dance if they don't win the ACC tournament?

So say a team goes undefeated through the conference play...and only losses one game that is played on Thursday at noon to a team that 8-20 on the year.....say that 8-20 team gets hot and wins 3 games in a row during the tourney.

You would rather send the team with a shit season to represent your conference on national television, in place of the one thats dominated all year?

If that is your opinion fine, but I just dont get it.

 

[HelenaHandBasket]

You do realize the other team is in the same boat. It also allows the team more time to recover prior to the next game. And I think the recover from travel is laughable since they will have 2 more days off and travel, by plane the day prior. And the atmosphere will suck whether they play at noon or 8. So many f***[*] crybabies

Did the other team dominate all season therefore deserving the best chance to get to the big Dance?

If that is the case, they should not have a tournament at all. But in the case of a 12 team tournament at a neutral site, yes, they do have the best chance by design. You do realize that the 12 BSC schools agreed to this format because it was the best format for them...right. No matter what you argue, the driving force behind it is the least expensive format that includes all schools. You might not like it, but it is what a majority of the schools wanted.

I think its what 9 or 10 of the Big Sky schools wanted. I guarantee its not what Weber or Montana wanted, and its another example of the BigSky conference turning its back on its bell cows and catering to the little guys that do nothing to push the Big Skys appearance.

Then is sucks to be Montana or Weber. But the BSC is not just Montana and Weber...or their fans. If they don't like, maybe they need to move on.

 

[HelenaHandBasket]

I don’t get the argument that a tourney doesn’t crown the best team in the league. Makes no sense to me at all. The whole point of the league tourney is to figure out who is playing the best RIGHT NOW, not weeks or months ago. Who gives a shit what the stat sheets say, settle it on the court like it should be. Also, the big dance is a stressful tourney at a neutral site. If you can’t win your own tourney, why would you be the best prepared for the big one?
So dumb. Really the participation trophy folks have gone overboard

So you're suggesting Duke shouldn't go to the Dance if they don't win the ACC tournament?

So say a team goes undefeated through the conference play...and only losses one game that is played on Thursday at noon to a team that 8-20 on the year.....say that 8-20 team gets hot and wins 3 games in a row during the tourney.

You would rather send the team with a shit season to represent your conference on national television, in place of the one thats dominated all year?

If that is your opinion fine, but I just dont get it.

WTF does "Thursday at noon" have to do with anything?

 

[BadlandsGrizFan]

Did the other team dominate all season therefore deserving the best chance to get to the big Dance?

If that is the case, they should not have a tournament at all. But in the case of a 12 team tournament at a neutral site, yes, they do have the best chance by design. You do realize that the 12 BSC schools agreed to this format because it was the best format for them...right. No matter what you argue, the driving force behind it is the least expensive format that includes all schools. You might not like it, but it is what a majority of the schools wanted.

I think its what 9 or 10 of the Big Sky schools wanted. I guarantee its not what Weber or Montana wanted, and its another example of the BigSky conference turning its back on its bell cows and catering to the little guys that do nothing to push the Big Skys appearance.

Then is sucks to be Montana or Weber. But the BSC is not just Montana and Weber...or their fans. If they don't like, maybe they need to move on.

Are you our previous commissioner? Because Your dumb fucking opinions on this conference seem to align with Foolertons.

 

[HelenaHandBasket]

If that is the case, they should not have a tournament at all. But in the case of a 12 team tournament at a neutral site, yes, they do have the best chance by design. You do realize that the 12 BSC schools agreed to this format because it was the best format for them...right. No matter what you argue, the driving force behind it is the least expensive format that includes all schools. You might not like it, but it is what a majority of the schools wanted.

I think its what 9 or 10 of the Big Sky schools wanted. I guarantee its not what Weber or Montana wanted, and its another example of the BigSky conference turning its back on its bell cows and catering to the little guys that do nothing to push the Big Skys appearance.

Then is sucks to be Montana or Weber. But the BSC is not just Montana and Weber...or their fans. If they don't like, maybe they need to move on.

Are you our previous commissioner? Because Your dumb f***[*] opinions on this conference seem to align with Foolertons.

The point asshat is there are 12 schools in the Conference and a majority of them wanted this setup. If a school doesn't like that, then maybe it is time for that school to move into a like-minded Conference. Not sure how difficult that is to understand. The BSC is not here to pander to Montana and Weber, it is here to do what the majority of the Conference would like as a path. Agree with it or not, this is more about Montana going along with the status quo instead of being proactive and doing something different.

 

[garizzalies]

I don’t get the argument that a tourney doesn’t crown the best team in the league. Makes no sense to me at all. The whole point of the league tourney is to figure out who is playing the best RIGHT NOW, not weeks or months ago. Who gives a shit what the stat sheets say, settle it on the court like it should be. Also, the big dance is a stressful tourney at a neutral site. If you can’t win your own tourney, why would you be the best prepared for the big one?
So dumb. Really the participation trophy folks have gone overboard

So you're suggesting Duke shouldn't go to the Dance if they don't win the ACC tournament?

So say a team goes undefeated through the conference play...and only losses one game that is played on Thursday at noon to a team that 8-20 on the year.....say that 8-20 team gets hot and wins 3 games in a row during the tourney.

You would rather send the team with a shit season to represent your conference on national television, in place of the one thats dominated all year?

If that is your opinion fine, but I just dont get it.

You would rather send the loser?
That’s not America. That’s not even mexico

 

[marceagfan5]

You do realize the other team is in the same boat. It also allows the team more time to recover prior to the next game. And I think the recover from travel is laughable since they will have 2 more days off and travel, by plane the day prior. And the atmosphere will suck whether they play at noon or 8. So many f***[*] crybabies

Did the other team dominate all season therefore deserving the best chance to get to the big Dance?

If that is the case, they should not have a tournament at all. But in the case of a 12 team tournament at a neutral site, yes, they do have the best chance by design. You do realize that the 12 BSC schools agreed to this format because it was the best format for them...right. No matter what you argue, the driving force behind it is the least expensive format that includes all schools. You might not like it, but it is what a majority of the schools wanted.

I think its what 9 or 10 of the Big Sky schools wanted. I guarantee its not what Weber or Montana wanted, and its another example of the BigSky conference turning its back on its bell cows and catering to the little guys that do nothing to push the Big Skys appearance.

Montana only had to play Eastern, Weber, and Idaho once this year...not sure that’s catering to the little guys of the conference...

One of the main reasons for moving to a neutral site, is the unbalanced league schedule like Montana’s (Weber’s was the same) above...I think Montana is the best team in the conference but I also think it’s easier to find who the best team in the conference is playing on a neutral court because Everyone doesn’t play each other twice during conference.

And like someone said earlier, I’d much rather have the hottest team representing the big sky in the dance regardless who it is and their record...

 

[Ursa Major]

Did the other team dominate all season therefore deserving the best chance to get to the big Dance?

If that is the case, they should not have a tournament at all. But in the case of a 12 team tournament at a neutral site, yes, they do have the best chance by design. You do realize that the 12 BSC schools agreed to this format because it was the best format for them...right. No matter what you argue, the driving force behind it is the least expensive format that includes all schools. You might not like it, but it is what a majority of the schools wanted.

I think its what 9 or 10 of the Big Sky schools wanted. I guarantee its not what Weber or Montana wanted, and its another example of the BigSky conference turning its back on its bell cows and catering to the little guys that do nothing to push the Big Skys appearance.

Then is sucks to be Montana or Weber. But the BSC is not just Montana and Weber...or their fans. If they don't like, maybe they need to move on.

Maybe it should count more at Weber and Montana? I wonder what the percentage of total league attendance is for these two fan bases as compared to the rest of the entire league's? Throw the kitties in with those two and it has to be at least 40% of all the BSC total attendence each most years. These are the fans that put their money down and make an effort to attend.

Unfortunately, fan interest and attendance (and money) aren't going to be preeminent factors for league decision in a socialist paradise like the BSC, but maybe it should?

 

[EverettGriz]

Did the other team dominate all season therefore deserving the best chance to get to the big Dance?

If that is the case, they should not have a tournament at all. But in the case of a 12 team tournament at a neutral site, yes, they do have the best chance by design. You do realize that the 12 BSC schools agreed to this format because it was the best format for them...right. No matter what you argue, the driving force behind it is the least expensive format that includes all schools. You might not like it, but it is what a majority of the schools wanted.

I think its what 9 or 10 of the Big Sky schools wanted. I guarantee its not what Weber or Montana wanted, and its another example of the BigSky conference turning its back on its bell cows and catering to the little guys that do nothing to push the Big Skys appearance.

Montana only had to play Eastern, Weber, and Idaho once this year...not sure that’s catering to the little guys of the conference...

One of the main reasons for moving to a neutral site, is the unbalanced league schedule like Montana’s (Weber’s was the same) above...I think Montana is the best team in the conference but I also think it’s easier to find who the best team in the conference is playing on a neutral court because Everyone doesn’t play each other twice during conference.

And like someone said earlier, I’d much rather have the hottest team representing the big sky in the dance regardless who it is and their record...

Are you serious with this?

Montana only played Idaho and ewoo once, ON THE ROAD. They won the conference by TWO GAMES.

But using your scenario, I'd say just scrap the entire regular season. We'll just tip it off in reNO for 3 or 4 games in early January, pick the winner and take the next 3 months off. Why even bother with the conference season?

maybe they need to move on

Hey! Finally something sensible from Basket!! This is precisely the point I've been making for years. Glad you've come around.

 

[HelenaHandBasket]

If that is the case, they should not have a tournament at all. But in the case of a 12 team tournament at a neutral site, yes, they do have the best chance by design. You do realize that the 12 BSC schools agreed to this format because it was the best format for them...right. No matter what you argue, the driving force behind it is the least expensive format that includes all schools. You might not like it, but it is what a majority of the schools wanted.

I think its what 9 or 10 of the Big Sky schools wanted. I guarantee its not what Weber or Montana wanted, and its another example of the BigSky conference turning its back on its bell cows and catering to the little guys that do nothing to push the Big Skys appearance.

Then is sucks to be Montana or Weber. But the BSC is not just Montana and Weber...or their fans. If they don't like, maybe they need to move on.

Maybe it should count more at Weber and Montana? I wonder what the percentage of total league attendance is for these two fan bases as compared to the rest of the entire league's? Throw the kitties in with those two and it has to be at least 40% of all the BSC total attendence each most years. These are the fans that put their money down and make an effort to attend.

Unfortunately, fan interest and attendance (and money) aren't going to be preeminent factors for league decision in a socialist paradise like the BSC, but maybe it should?

Everyone wants to keep using attendance as a valid reason for it to be different, but it is very evident that attendance is a non-factor. Attendance does not drive the BSC in any sport, but it does drive a few select member institutions.

 

[HelenaHandBasket]

If that is the case, they should not have a tournament at all. But in the case of a 12 team tournament at a neutral site, yes, they do have the best chance by design. You do realize that the 12 BSC schools agreed to this format because it was the best format for them...right. No matter what you argue, the driving force behind it is the least expensive format that includes all schools. You might not like it, but it is what a majority of the schools wanted.

I think its what 9 or 10 of the Big Sky schools wanted. I guarantee its not what Weber or Montana wanted, and its another example of the BigSky conference turning its back on its bell cows and catering to the little guys that do nothing to push the Big Skys appearance.

Montana only had to play Eastern, Weber, and Idaho once this year...not sure that’s catering to the little guys of the conference...

One of the main reasons for moving to a neutral site, is the unbalanced league schedule like Montana’s (Weber’s was the same) above...I think Montana is the best team in the conference but I also think it’s easier to find who the best team in the conference is playing on a neutral court because Everyone doesn’t play each other twice during conference.

And like someone said earlier, I’d much rather have the hottest team representing the big sky in the dance regardless who it is and their record...

Are you serious with this?

Montana only played Idaho and ewoo once, ON THE ROAD. They won the conference by TWO GAMES.

But using your scenario, I'd say just scrap the entire regular season. We'll just tip it off in reNO for 3 or 4 games in early January, pick the winner and take the next 3 months off. Why even bother with the conference season?

maybe they need to move on

Hey! Finally something sensible from Basket!! This is precisely the point I've been making for years. Glad you've come around.

I have always believed this but the difference is that I blame UM, you continually want to blame the BSC.

 

[EverettGriz]

Why do you blame UM? For passing on the WAC? Shit, even a guy like me who realizes how pathetic the bsc is recognizes that was absolutely the correct decision at the time. I said so then.

When there is another opportunity, if UM takes a pass then, I'll blame them as well. In the meantime, what I blame the bsc for is being a DI in name only. Which is what they are.

 

[HelenaHandBasket]

Why do you blame UM? For passing on the WAC? Shit, even a guy like me who realizes how pathetic the bsc is recognizes that was absolutely the correct decision at the time. I said so then.

When there is another opportunity, if UM takes a pass then, I'll blame them as well. In the meantime, what I blame the bsc for is being a DI in name only. Which is what they are.

UM would rather settle for the status quo of the BSC than be proactive and either find an out or work to make change in the BSC. I not once mentioned the WAC.

 

[Grizzlies1982]

Why the hell all this talk talk about venue, game times, seedings et. al. We should all revolt like the French against the whole idea of a tournamnt in the first place. I mean, why?? This isn't the Big East or the Big Ten at Madison Square Garden, where attendance and TV revenue means Gold and Press for all the participating schools. This is the Big Sky at Reno in front of thousands of empty seats, capped off by a crappy third-rate TV deal for the championship.

The Big Sky should have one goal, and one goal only: Making sure the best team represents the conference at the Big Dance. And that team should be the regular season champion, period. That's our best shot at a win, and cut of the TV pot that goes with every win. And I would be making the same argument if Weber or Idaho had won the title.

Conferences remain tiny insignificant nobodies when they try to be like the big boys rather than marshaling their own best resouces for their one big chance at fame and money on a national stage.

Excellent plan citay. The Big Sky should move the conference tourney to Madison Square Gardens.

Buying flights to New York is probably comparable to tickets into Reno or Boise, and it would be far more entertaining. To hell with it, let's revolt, gather up the pitch forks and storm the conference headquarters until they move it to NYC. Crazy? You think I'm crazy? It can be done!
Nothing like a mob to motivate the powers that be. :ugeek: