The Reno wreck and the BSC tournament idea

[Silvertip]

Watching South Dakota and South Dakota State right now. I will never understand why UM doesn't host the tournament and bid to host regionals for the NCAA. Stands are full in Sioux Falls.

Sioux Falls hosts because they have fantastic facilities at the Sanford Pentagon. Denny Sanford donated a crap ton of money and that complex is ridiculous. I looked at a job there once and got a tour...it’s amazing. Having both schools an hour from Sioux Falls helped that attendance though, for sure!

And a full house in Sioux Falls is 12,000 people. The reason the 7,000 seat Reno facility looks big is because ANY venue looks big when there are only 50 folks in attendance.

 

[ISUguy]

They did try the "last season champion host the next year" deal for a couple of years. They also just rotated it. I think those both went by the wayside when a bloody awful (like 7-24 awful) ISU team got to host, won the tournament in front of their home fans, and then went on to lose by, as I recall, 313 to UNLV in the NCAA tournament.

Just let the league champion host. f*** the logistical problems. They have these new fangled things called "computers" that allow a staff person to book flights right from his/her office chair.

Your memory is a little fuzzy, Everett. That 1987 tournament was held in Flagstaff, not Pocatello. The top three seeds all lost in the first round, and ISU, the seventh seed, got hot and wound up winning the tournament. As a result, the Big Sky implemented a few changes to the bracket structure to reward regular season play. The top two teams in the league standings were given byes into the semifinal round, while the third- and fourth-seeded teams began played in the quarterfinals on Thursday. The remaining four teams (seeds 5–8) played an additional game on Wednesday; four victories in as many days were now required for a lower-half team to win the title. The top four seeds advanced to the semifinals and the tournament was won by the top-seed.

But the tournament was still not played at the home court of the regular season champion. Boise State won the league title that year, but the tournament was played in Bozeman.

The Big Sky has experimented with a number of different formats over the years, which have been all over the map. The only thing consistent about the approach has been that it keeps changing. I would anticipate it will change again after the Boise experiment.

 

[debellatio]

I think Spokane is the most logical spot if you are looking at attendance only. It is within driving distance of 5 or 6 teams, has a great facility, and the area is interested in basketball. It might give EWU more of a home court advantage but I think UM and UI would have a strong fan base. I think Billings would have less people than Reno.

One of the problems with Reno is that they didn't market the tournament locally. I went last year and the guy at the car rental desk didn't know the tournament was going on. Reno was originally picked probably because of the activities outside of basketball. It is really a nice setup with the three hotel/casinos only a block from the event center. It's too bad more people didn't give it a chance and go. I wish I could have gone back this year but my schedule didn't allow it.

 

[EverettGriz]

Look, the central problem is that outside Ogden, Missoula and Bozeman, teams in the bsc cannot draw fans to games in their own TOWN. Kasper talked earlier this year about how they were surprised and disappointed by the low attendance in reNO. Why?! How?! Did you suddenly expect 7,000 psu and sac fans to magically descend on reNO when they draw 500 for home games? Boise may be a bit better, but not markedly so.

If you're going to have a tournament (and the entire concept is silly in the bsc), it must be held at the conference champion.

 

[AZDoc]

Look, the central problem is that outside Ogden, Missoula and Bozeman, teams in the bsc cannot draw fans to games in their own TOWN. Kasper talked earlier this year about how they were surprised and disappointed by the low attendance in reNO. Why?! How?! Did you suddenly expect 7,000 psu and sac fans to magically descend on reNO when they draw 500 for home games? Boise may be a bit better, but not markedly so.

If you're going to have a tournament (and the entire concept is silly in the bsc), it must be held at the conference champion.

Yep. That's the issue underlying. Overall poor attendance. Last year the BSC was 21/32 conferences with an average of 2098 in attendance. So if you take Weber and their 6869, Montana 3808, MSU 2685, and NoDak 2139, the rest are below that:

PSU 538, Sac 777, Idaho 1009, ISU 1435, NAU 1050, EWU 1559, SUU 1846, NoCo 1336.

The overall problem is lack of interest for the most part. The conference HAS to reward the regular season champion, otherwise no matter where the "neutral site" event is, the attendance will be rather low. My opinion is part of the reason for this is because if a place like Sac State wins...the conference exposes a major underlying flaw in that they don't require certain upgrades in order to be in the conference.

 

[AllWeatherFan]

Oh well, at least we're not in the Summit League.

 

[HelenaHandBasket]

I am not sure which number is smaller...the number of fans at the BSC tourney or the number of BSC fans that care about the number of fans at the BSC tourney.

 

[HelenaHandBasket]

What if the Conference decided to let the conference champion host the tournament the following year?

IMO, terrible idea and still doesn't address everyone's complaint that the winner should be awarded that season.

Ok, then how do you address it? As I said Kasper last year pegged cost savings for the schools as one of the criteria for doing this because they did not have to wait until the last minute to make reservations. Nothing is perfect and, yes, you can always have that scenario where a PSU has a chance. Having it in a BSC town has to be a step up from playing in and empty arena. Everett, I did not know they tried this....

There is not a clear cut way to address it with what the BSC member schools want. And once again, too many people are hung up on the number of fans...they are far down the list in the criteria list for tourney location.

 

[AZDoc]

What if the Conference decided to let the conference champion host the tournament the following year?

IMO, terrible idea and still doesn't address everyone's complaint that the winner should be awarded that season.

Ok, then how do you address it? As I said Kasper last year pegged cost savings for the schools as one of the criteria for doing this because they did not have to wait until the last minute to make reservations. Nothing is perfect and, yes, you can always have that scenario where a PSU has a chance. Having it in a BSC town has to be a step up from playing in and empty arena. Everett, I did not know they tried this....

There is not a clear cut way to address it with what the BSC member schools want. And once again, too many people are hung up on the number of fans...they are far down the list in the criteria list for tourney location.

Which is part of the problem, then. What list do you have that shows what the BSC has for criteria?

 

[HelenaHandBasket]

IMO, terrible idea and still doesn't address everyone's complaint that the winner should be awarded that season.

Ok, then how do you address it? As I said Kasper last year pegged cost savings for the schools as one of the criteria for doing this because they did not have to wait until the last minute to make reservations. Nothing is perfect and, yes, you can always have that scenario where a PSU has a chance. Having it in a BSC town has to be a step up from playing in and empty arena. Everett, I did not know they tried this....

There is not a clear cut way to address it with what the BSC member schools want. And once again, too many people are hung up on the number of fans...they are far down the list in the criteria list for tourney location.

Which is part of the problem, then. What list do you have that shows what the BSC has for criteria?

Let me ask you this, what has the BSC demonstrated with Reno and Boise that makes you think the fans are near the top of the criteria? When they are looking for a neutral site that can accommodate two 12 team tournaments and are looking to keep the cost down for all member schools all while minimizing the financial bottom line for the Conference... And don't get me wrong, I am sure they would love a shit ton of fans at the games, but they are willing to sacrifice numbers to meet other needs.

 

[EverettGriz]

Well of COURSE fans are not at a concern. That's the entire problem with the bsc. Fans are NEVER considered. Perhaps that's why the league averages less than a 1,000 for BB and 3,000 for FB. Well, that and a shit-ton of schools who have no business being in the conference, of course.

#foolerton
#bsc

 

[HelenaHandBasket]

Well of COURSE fans are not at a concern. That's the entire problem with the bsc. Fans are NEVER considered. Perhaps that's why the league averages less than a 1,000 for BB and 3,000 for FB. Well, that and a shit-ton of schools who have no business being in the conference, of course.

#foolerton
#bsc

You ever think that those averages are why the BSC doesn't really worry about the attendance?

 

[Silvertip]

I think Spokane is the most logical spot if you are looking at attendance only. It is within driving distance of 5 or 6 teams, has a great facility, and the area is interested in basketball. It might give EWU more of a home court advantage but I think UM and UI would have a strong fan base. I think Billings would have less people than Reno.

One of the problems with Reno is that they didn't market the tournament locally. I went last year and the guy at the car rental desk didn't know the tournament was going on. Reno was originally picked probably because of the activities outside of basketball. It is really a nice setup with the three hotel/casinos only a block from the event center. It's too bad more people didn't give it a chance and go. I wish I could have gone back this year but my schedule didn't allow it.

Agreed... uhh Billings would have fewer people.

 

[PlayerRep]

Well of COURSE fans are not at a concern. That's the entire problem with the bsc. Fans are NEVER considered. Perhaps that's why the league averages less than a 1,000 for BB and 3,000 for FB. Well, that and a shit-ton of schools who have no business being in the conference, of course.

#foolerton
#bsc

3,000 for football? What's the point of just making up stuff? Looking only at UM's attendance, the conference averages more than that?

Why don't you look at the averages both both sports, and provide to us?

 

[runtheoption]

Watching South Dakota and South Dakota State right now. I will never understand why UM doesn't host the tournament and bid to host regionals for the NCAA. Stands are full in Sioux Falls.

Sioux Falls hosts because they have fantastic facilities at the Sanford Pentagon. Denny Sanford donated a crap ton of money and that complex is ridiculous. I looked at a job there once and got a tour...it’s amazing. Having both schools an hour from Sioux Falls helped that attendance though, for sure!

Just a slight correction -- the Sanford Pentagon is an outstanding facility, but is not where the Summit League Championship was played. The Pentagon is pretty small, seating 3,200 for basketball. They had the local D-II conference (NSIC) championship game last night at the same time as the Summit League championship game. It is also hosting the NAIA D-II championship starting tonight (Oregon Tech and Warner Pacific are 2 colleges playing in it from the Big Sky area).

The Denny Sanford Premier Center is what you saw last night on ESPN2 with SDSU vs USD. It is about 4 miles from the Pentagon. It holds about 12,000 for basketball. There were 11,114 folks there last night, which is the Summit League championship game record crowd.

 

[IdaGriz01]

Well of COURSE fans are not at a concern. That's the entire problem with the bsc. Fans are NEVER considered. Perhaps that's why the league averages less than a 1,000 for BB and 3,000 for FB. Well, that and a shit-ton of schools who have no business being in the conference, of course.

#foolerton
#bsc

3,000 for football? What's the point of just making up stuff? Looking only at UM's attendance, the conference averages more than that?

Why don't you look at the averages both both sports, and provide to us?

Could not resist ... because I already had the numbers downloaded for football and wondered what the NCAA stats showed for basketball.

Based on the latest NCAA reports:
The Big Sky averaged 2,098 home attendance for basketball. That's #21. Not very good ... but still better than the Ohio Valley, the Ivy and nine others.

FYI: Big Sky football attendance averaged 9,719. That's third for FCS behind the SWAC (#1) and the MVFC.

 

[AZDoc]

Ok, then how do you address it? As I said Kasper last year pegged cost savings for the schools as one of the criteria for doing this because they did not have to wait until the last minute to make reservations. Nothing is perfect and, yes, you can always have that scenario where a PSU has a chance. Having it in a BSC town has to be a step up from playing in and empty arena. Everett, I did not know they tried this....

There is not a clear cut way to address it with what the BSC member schools want. And once again, too many people are hung up on the number of fans...they are far down the list in the criteria list for tourney location.

Which is part of the problem, then. What list do you have that shows what the BSC has for criteria?

Let me ask you this, what has the BSC demonstrated with Reno and Boise that makes you think the fans are near the top of the criteria? When they are looking for a neutral site that can accommodate two 12 team tournaments and are looking to keep the cost down for all member schools all while minimizing the financial bottom line for the Conference... And don't get me wrong, I am sure they would love a shit ton of fans at the games, but they are willing to sacrifice numbers to meet other needs.

Oh, I'm not calling you out...believe me I agree with you...I was just wondering your thoughts on said "list" as to their priorities. I think they're trying to be something that they are not and don't think if we saw the financials, there would be much of a difference.

 

[grizfan47]

Had the tourney been at Mizzu, Spokane or Salt Lake we would have been there. Reno provided too many obstacles. The one obstacle that did not exist was getting a good seat!

Please, please, please Big Sky Conference......figure this out or let egriz do it for you!

 

[HelenaHandBasket]

Had the tourney been at Mizzu, Spokane or Salt Lake we would have been there. Reno provided too many obstacles. The one obstacle that did not exist was getting a good seat!

Please, please, please Big Sky Conference......figure this out or let egriz do it for you!

The fix is apparently moving to Boise.

 

[EverettGriz]

Well of COURSE fans are not at a concern. That's the entire problem with the bsc. Fans are NEVER considered. Perhaps that's why the league averages less than a 1,000 for BB and 3,000 for FB. Well, that and a shit-ton of schools who have no business being in the conference, of course.

#foolerton
#bsc

3,000 for football? What's the point of just making up stuff? Looking only at UM's attendance, the conference averages more than that?

Why don't you look at the averages both both sports, and provide to us?

Could not resist ... because I already had the numbers downloaded for football and wondered what the NCAA stats showed for basketball.

Based on the latest NCAA reports:
The Big Sky averaged 2,098 home attendance for basketball. That's #21. Not very good ... but still better than the Ohio Valley, the Ivy and nine others.

FYI: Big Sky football attendance averaged 9,719. That's third for FCS behind the SWAC (#1) and the MVFC.

What are the medians? Those will be farrrr more telling.