Does the Big Sky have an attendance problem?

[jon]

Hi all,

I wrote a post asking, Does the Big Sky have an attendance problem?

Montana was second in the BSC in average attendance last year with almost 4,000 fans per game, but the average for the conference was around 2,300, which ranked 20th out of 21 conferences. So I was wondering what you guys thought? Does the Big Sky have an attendance problem that they need to do something about to try and change? Or is it simply a fact of life of being a mid-major conference? Would love to hear your thoughts on this...

 

[notAcatfan]

i think its just a small market issue. basketball is not as big as football (obviously) and i just think people in the big sky markets dont think the opportunity cost is worth a bball game vs. football. i know that less people drive to Bozeman and Missoula for a game. and i would bet that people go see Gonzaga or Whitworth instead of Eastern. PSU has a gym comparable to my old high school gym, so i think big sky fans really just dont care. too much (good?) competition surrounding our smaller schools and not enough population to back it as. i dont know much about other schools, but i would guess it would be the same story

 

[PlayerRep]

Hi all,

I wrote a post asking, Does the Big Sky have an attendance problem?

Montana was second in the BSC in average attendance last year with almost 4,000 fans per game, but the average for the conference was around 2,300, which ranked 20th out of 21 conferences. So I was wondering what you guys thought? Does the Big Sky have an attendance problem that they need to do something about to try and change? Or is it simply a fact of life of being a mid-major conference? Would love to hear your thoughts on this...

The Big Sky was 20th out of 31 conferences, not 21.

 

[EverettGriz]

Yes.

 

[bengal]

Yes, Big Sky attendance has been on a steady decline since Boise State, Idaho and Nevada left the conference in the mid-1990s. (Big Sky average attendance has dropped in nine of the 15 seasons since BSU and Idaho's last year in the league in 1996.) These three programs were replaced by Sac State and Portland State, neither of whom have ever drawn well, and Northern Colorado, who has responded to good teams with increased attendance in the last couple of years -- but still plays in a very small gym. As a result, average attendance last year was 2,900 per game -- compared to 4,400 per game in BSU and Idaho's last BSC seasons.

In addition to losing three established rivals that had good programs when they left the conference, the Big Sky suffers from the same problems as most mid-major schools: over-exposure. You can sit at home in your easy chair and watch college and NBA hoops most any night of the week from the time the NBA starts in late October until the finals conclude in June. And on any given night, with a satellite dish or even a decent cable package, you can watch dozens of college basketball games.

Teams like Weber State, Sacramento State and Northern Colorado also have to compete with NBA franchises in their back yards (And NAU and Idaho State, if you consider a three-hour drive "in your backyard.") And traditional Big Sky basketball schools Montana and Montana State have seen football become the "big dogs" on campus, clearly drawing attention away from the basketball programs.

Finally, Big Sky basketball is probably a below-average product when compared to the BCS conference schools most years. Every now and then a Big Sky school will rise up and win an NCAA tournament game, but one is the limit. You have to go back to Idaho State in 1977 to find the last time a BSC team won more than one game in the NCAA tournament. And you have to go back to Idaho State in 1958 and 59 for the last time a Big Sky team won an NCAA tournament game in back-to-back seasons. As a result, there is no sustainable momentum from one season to the next for any of the league schools.

 

[jon]

The Big Sky was 20th out of 31 conferences, not 21.

Sorry, typo in my post.

Yes, Big Sky attendance has been on a steady decline since Boise State, Idaho and Nevada left the conference in the mid-1990s. (Big Sky average attendance has dropped in nine of the 15 seasons since BSU and Idaho's last year in the league in 1996.) These three programs were replaced by Sac State and Portland State, neither of whom have ever drawn well, and Northern Colorado, who has responded to good teams with increased attendance in the last couple of years -- but still plays in a very small gym. As a result, average attendance last year was 2,900 per game -- compared to 4,400 per game in BSU and Idaho's last BSC seasons.

In addition to losing three established rivals that had good programs when they left the conference, the Big Sky suffers from the same problems as most mid-major schools: over-exposure. You can sit at home in your easy chair and watch college and NBA hoops most any night of the week from the time the NBA starts in late October until the finals conclude in June. And on any given night, with a satellite dish or even a decent cable package, you can watch dozens of college basketball games.

Teams like Weber State, Sacramento State and Northern Colorado also have to compete with NBA franchises in their back yards (And NAU and Idaho State, if you consider a three-hour drive "in your backyard.") And traditional Big Sky basketball schools Montana and Montana State have seen football become the "big dogs" on campus, clearly drawing attention away from the basketball programs.

Finally, Big Sky basketball is probably a below-average product when compared to the BCS conference schools most years. Every now and then a Big Sky school will rise up and win an NCAA tournament game, but one is the limit. You have to go back to Idaho State in 1977 to find the last time a BSC team won more than one game in the NCAA tournament. And you have to go back to Idaho State in 1958 and 59 for the last time a Big Sky team won an NCAA tournament game in back-to-back seasons. As a result, there is no sustainable momentum from one season to the next for any of the league schools.

Great post.

I think you are right on with the over-exposure, and this is a problem across all sports. I think more and more people like sitting at home with their HDTV, where they can multi-task, turn the channel if they bored, not spend the time getting to and from the game, not spend the money to attend the game, etc. This especially hurts BSC I would think (and all similar conferences) in that it is already hard to attract casual fans, because these teams aren't ever mentioned on national TV, so the players are lesser known, etc.

So the question becomes - is there a way to help it and increase attendance? Is there a way for lower tier BSC teams to attract better non-conference opponents?

 

[bengal]

So the question becomes - is there a way to help it and increase attendance? Is there a way for lower tier BSC teams to attract better non-conference opponents?[/quote]

I think smarter scheduling is a place to start. Idaho State has played murderous non-conference schedules over the last five years, trying to fill the coffers with "money games." The problem with that is that the team is usually six or seven games under .500 before they even get to conference play, they play virtually nobody of any interest at home, and they have killed fan interest and player confidence before Big Sky play even begins. They have a much better schedule this year, and they are playing home-and-homes with Wyoming, Loyola Marymount and North Dakota to get better balance. They are still playing four "money games," but instead of playing UCLA or Kansas, as they have in the past, they are going to Boise State and Utah.

The other obvious "fix" is to build a good team--look at Northern Colorado and how their attendance has gone up significantly since they became competitive in the last two seasons. There is just simply no substitution for success -- although in markets like Portland or Sacramento, I'm not sure there's anything you can do to draw "big" crowds.

Finally, it really helps when MSU, Montana and Weber are "good." They are the traditional rivals for most teams in the league and when those three teams are competitive, they bring out more fans when they are on the road.

 

[Swillbury]

Depends what you would call a "problem". 20 out of 31 is better than I thought the Big Sky would do, considering that we get a 14-16 seed mostly every year. There is not really a solution to this "problem" unless the conference can find a Gonzaga like run where they become more of a staple of the country. The Griz were close with Larry K. and I feel they will get there with Tinks (if he stays haha). So a problem? Maybe but not one that matters IMO

 

[coyote]

Depends what you would call a "problem". 20 out of 31 is better than I thought the Big Sky would do, considering that we get a 14-16 seed mostly every year. There is not really a solution to this "problem" unless the conference can find a Gonzaga like run where they become more of a staple of the country. The Griz were close with Larry K. and I feel they will get there with Tinks (if he stays haha). So a problem? Maybe but not one that matters IMO

Welome back Swilly

 

[wbtfg]

Just as an FYI,Carroll College would rank 4th on that list behind Weber, UM, and MSU.

 

[WILDCATFAN]

It doesnt help when 4 big sky venues hold less than 3,000, and the teams that used to draw well (MSU, EWU, ISU) are going through rough stretches.