BSC Tournament

[Mousegriz]

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.

I heard that Reno isn't too far from some of the California "Whineries". Some guys should take a quick trip over there between games.

 

[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.

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.

That's factually inaccurate. The UM study said that they were prepared and willing to make the move if the right opportunity arose. The reason I mentioned the WAC is because it's the only verifiable offer we know of that UM has had, and that is when the study was completed. If the MWC comes calling (and they will) UM will gone like that girl in the movie.

 

[Ursa Major]

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.

I heard that Reno isn't too far from some of the California "Whineries". Some guys should take a quick trip over there between games.

This is exactly the same idea the Donner Party had.

 

[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.

I heard that Reno isn't too far from some of the California "Whineries". Some guys should take a quick trip over there between games.

This is exactly the same idea the Donner Party had.

:lol:

 

[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.

That's factually inaccurate. The UM study said that they were prepared and willing to make the move if the right opportunity arose. The reason I mentioned the WAC is because it's the only verifiable offer we know of that UM has had, and that is when the study was completed. If the MWC comes calling (and they will) UM will gone like that girl in the movie.

So you want them to sit and wait? This is exactly what I am talking about. There is nothing proactive about sitting and waiting. Not sure how outdated that study is now either. Also, wouldn't that just alienate the playoff crowd?

 

[marceagfan5]

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 actually want the tourney played at the regular season champ, it’s a no brainer for a conference like the BSC....Unfortunately we decided to add too many teams, leaving an unbalanced schedule and a travel nightmare so we are stuck with Reno and Boise, both of which are jokes.

But...as it is now the regular season doesn’t hold much weight because there really is no benefit if you finish first or fourth right now

 

[HelenaHandBasket]

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 actually want the tourney played at the regular season champ, it’s a no brainer for a conference like the BSC....Unfortunately we decided to add too many teams, leaving an unbalanced schedule and a travel nightmare so we are stuck with Reno and Boise, both of which are jokes.

But...as it is now the regular season doesn’t hold much weight because there really is no benefit if you finish first or fourth right now

The unbalanced schedule and tournament location are just a byproduct of the big issue...12 teams.

 

[Ursa Major]

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.

The two questions that pop out are: Should money/attendance matter? What should these select schools do about the situation?

How long would Root be covering the BSC football if the Montana schools departed? Attendance and viewing are important in athletics, especially outside of the the magic empire that is the BSC.

 

[AZGrizFan]

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 actually want the tourney played at the regular season champ, it’s a no brainer for a conference like the BSC....Unfortunately we decided to add too many teams, leaving an unbalanced schedule and a travel nightmare so we are stuck with Reno and Boise, both of which are jokes.

But...as it is now the regular season doesn’t hold much weight because there really is no benefit if you finish first or fourth right now

The unbalanced schedule and tournament location are just a byproduct of the big issue...12 teams.

Here we are in the basketball forum discussing a football problem. :lol: :lol:

Unbalanced schedules: Yay or nay?

 

[Ursa Major]

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 actually want the tourney played at the regular season champ, it’s a no brainer for a conference like the BSC....Unfortunately we decided to add too many teams, leaving an unbalanced schedule and a travel nightmare so we are stuck with Reno and Boise, both of which are jokes.

But...as it is now the regular season doesn’t hold much weight because there really is no benefit if you finish first or fourth right now

The unbalanced schedule and tournament location are just a byproduct of the big issue...12 teams.

The answer:

 

[HelenaHandBasket]

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?




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

I actually want the tourney played at the regular season champ, it’s a no brainer for a conference like the BSC....Unfortunately we decided to add too many teams, leaving an unbalanced schedule and a travel nightmare so we are stuck with Reno and Boise, both of which are jokes.

But...as it is now the regular season doesn’t hold much weight because there really is no benefit if you finish first or fourth right now

The unbalanced schedule and tournament location are just a byproduct of the big issue...12 teams.

Here we are in the basketball forum discussing a football problem. :lol: :lol:

Unbalanced schedules: Yay or nay?

It is a basketball issue too.

 

[mtgriz]

Have the conference champs host the following year’s tournament. Teams can make travel plans in advance. The regular season championship at least provides a deferred reward.

 

[HelenaHandBasket]

Have the conference champs host the following year’s tournament. Teams can make travel plans in advance. The regular season championship at least provides a deferred reward.

This would solve zero.

 

[GrizLA]

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!

BINGO! :clap:

 

[BadlandsGrizFan]

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.

Do I smell a move up thread???