• Hi Guest, want to participate in the discussions, keep track of read/unread posts access private forums and more? Create your free account and increase the benefits of your eGriz.com experience today!

So, what's next for the BSC Leadership?

mtgrizrule said:
EverettGriz said:
Citay, I'm not sure I completely agree. I'm not sure market share is critical for televised basketball. To quote the great George Castanza when he's asked by the exec at NBC why anyone would watch the show he and Jerry were writing: "Because it's on TV".

If the bsc would simply get some of their better games on television, people would watch. Would it be Duke/UNC numbers? Uhh, hardly. But the top teams in this league play good, exciting BB, and people will watch it.

That all said, as I noted above, there's little incentive for Root to broadcast the games without the bsc stepping up with some cash. As I've noted before, the BSC football deal with Root was largely a way to ensure that the smaller cable companies in the NW continued to carry Root, so the station became more valuable when it was on the market. Now that it's been sold to the Mariners, that incentive has, to some extent, gone away, although the Mariners would still like to own the Montana, Idaho markets.
Click to expand...

EG, you don't know how many times I have channel surfed and found small to mid major conference games on various networks. I love watching the mid major and small conferences. To be honest, I am so overwhelmed by all the Big 5 conference games all over tv. I look forward for other games. Do I watch P5 games? I sure do, depending on matchups. Oregon State, Utah, and Nebraska are programs I like to watch, due to either GRIZ ties or me loving Nebraska sports due to living there for quite awhile. I search for other games frequently Wednesdays through Sunday. I find a lot of games. I never stumble upon a Big Sky game though, other than North Dakota games on whatever network they play on.

I'd be happy to pay for a reliable online option as well, but prefer tv. I honestly question the efforts the powers to be in this conference have put forth for basketball. This is one of many reasons why I question Montana sticking with the Big Sky or not flexing their muscles a little more w/in the conference. Then again, being we are out west in a state with a small population, we are likely still pretty far away from getting to where many of us would like to be. That would be as a member of the Mountain West Conference. I hope our champions center and improved facilities put us in position to be selected. We need more corporate backers though. Not really sure which companies are in position and willing to step it up for Montana.

In the meantime, we can patiently wait and hope for the conference to become better. I wonder how close we are to having a new conference commissioner named?
Click to expand...
Anyone have any insights on this?
 
As a fan, and that's all I am, nothing frustrates me more than seeing refs make calls on contact that cannot possibly have seen. When the ref on one of the Free Throw Line Extended wings makes a call inside that the inside ref does not call, it almost always seems to be on contact that supposedly occurred with the offender's body between the ref and the play. Without x-Ray vision, it is impossible for that ref to have seen that foul, but they always seem to call it anyway. Is there some sort of "law of physics" exception that allows a ref to make such a call based on the ref's deduction that the way the victim reacted, there must have been contact?
 
bearister said:
As a fan, and that's all I am, nothing frustrates me more than seeing refs make calls on contact that cannot possibly have seen. When the ref on one of the Free Throw Line Extended wings makes a call inside that the inside ref does not call, it almost always seems to be on contact that supposedly occurred with the offender's body between the ref and the play. Without x-Ray vision, it is impossible for that ref to have seen that foul, but they always seem to call it anyway. Is there some sort of "law of physics" exception that allows a ref to make such a call based on the ref's deduction that the way the victim reacted, there must have been contact?
Click to expand...


There are so many factors to consider. With that said, the toughest area to officiate and see is the paint. For me, I saw things better from distance. I preferred to be closer to the corners watching the paint than near the basket. You'd be surprised how often the official further away actually may see more and clearer. I am sure it is even more difficult at the higher levels of play. Things like this should be discussed among the officials before the game and as it is progressing. Many officials get upset at other officials for blowing whistles away from their designated area.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Back
Top