Yeah, I can certainly see...

[EverettGriz]

Everett, this entire move is more about saving money for the individual schools than it is about making money for the conference.

Oh, I absolutely get that. And I still argue it's the wrong move. Support your best, make the others catch up or die trying. That's how you improve.

 

[HelenaHandBasket]

Why? Is it any different for football? I don't see the BSC operating to benefit their top FB programs.

And beyond that, at our level, there's far more revenue to be generated from successful BB teams than there ever will be FB teams.

Because it is easier for Sac St and Southern Utah to supplement their athletic budget with 1 football game against Colorado or Utah than it is to supplement it with basketball. Currently there is no way for individual schools to supplement their athletic departments with basketball that can measure up to a single football game.

 

[HelenaHandBasket]

Everett, this entire move is more about saving money for the individual schools than it is about making money for the conference.

Oh, I absolutely get that. And I still argue it's the wrong move. Support your best, make the others catch up or die trying. That's how you improve.

And that is why it will never happen while in the BSC, you know it and I know it. As long as UM decides to stay, they have to live by the rules of the many.

 

[EverettGriz]

Everett, this entire move is more about saving money for the individual schools than it is about making money for the conference.

Oh, I absolutely get that. And I still argue it's the wrong move. Support your best, make the others catch up or die trying. That's how you improve.

And that is why it will never happen while in the BSC, you know it and I know it. As long as UM decides to stay, they have to live by the rules of the many.

On that point we agree 100%.

But if we the fans don't caterwaul about their shitty decisions, who will? I think they need to hear it.

 

[HelenaHandBasket]

Everett, this entire move is more about saving money for the individual schools than it is about making money for the conference.

Oh, I absolutely get that. And I still argue it's the wrong move. Support your best, make the others catch up or die trying. That's how you improve.

And that is why it will never happen while in the BSC, you know it and I know it. As long as UM decides to stay, they have to live by the rules of the many.

On that point we agree 100%.

But if we the fans don't caterwaul about their shitty decisions, who will? I think they need to hear it.

Falling on deaf ears.

 

[EverettGriz]

Yeah, because who in their right minds wouldn't listen to their ticket purchasing, donation giving fans?

Oh yeah. The BSC. Sigh....

 

[HelenaHandBasket]

Yeah, because who in their right minds wouldn't listen to their ticket purchasing, donation giving fans?

Oh yeah. The BSC. Sigh....

You seem to think that other Big Sky schools have the same type fan as Montana...a majority don't. Basketball attendance throughout the conference tells the story, and that is why they know there will be little push back from fans at most schools.

Outside of UM and WSU, I doubt any cares.

 

[EverettGriz]

And those are the only two programs -- along with eastern -- the conference should be concerned with. Until the others can prove they can compete, they should be left to fight over the crumbs. Get better, or get out.

 

[HelenaHandBasket]

And those are the only two programs -- along with eastern -- the conference should be concerned with. Until the others can prove they can compete, they should be left to fight over the crumbs. Get better, or get out.

The only way it happens is if you take money from the rich and give to the poor, and I hope that never happens because it will destroy what UM has achieved. So to sum it up, will never happen, but keep beating your drum Everett, because I don't think you are wrong, just outnumbered.

 

[Potomac Griz]

For 14 teams it is too costly and difficult to make arrangements, sometimes with less than a week notice, to attend the tournament.

If it's too costly for all of the teams to make arrangements, maybe the tournament shouldn't be expanded to include all 12 teams. In fact wouldn't it make more sense to continue it being hosted the way it is now and actually go down to 6 teams again like it was before?

If it's being pushed by the presidents of the member schools, is it just a handful of them (the ones who don't draw well anyway) or is it all of them? I can't imagine Weber or Montana would be too happy about this upcoming change.

I guess this is what happens when a conference adds a fuck -load of schools that have little to no support for their basketball programs. Those schools end up the majority & the schools that actually help keep the conference semi-respectable end up having to make sacrifices.

Bleh...

 

[br fan]

The reason for the neutral sites is the expansion of tournament to 12 teams. This year UM held both tournaments, was maxed out with the 16 teams present, and stated they did not have the capability to host in the future if both the men's and the women's tournaments with 24 teams were to be held in Missoula.

 

[Grizbeer]

That was a great atmosphere and showed well last night, but truth be told I wouldn't mind knowing for sure the tournament will be held at a set place and watching Reno get owned by montana. I don't think Spokane or billings would have a non-basketball draw that would justify putting in vacation and arranging travel for a 3 day vacation, but Reno would.

 

[HelenaHandBasket]

The reason for the neutral sites is the expansion of tournament to 12 teams. This year UM held both tournaments, was maxed out with the 16 teams present, and stated they did not have the capability to host in the future if both the men's and the women's tournaments with 24 teams were to be held in Missoula.

It is not necessarily going to be a neutral site, it is going to be a predetermined site.

 

[CDAGRIZ]

I guess this is what happens when a conference adds a fuck -load of schools that have little to no support for their basketball programs. Those schools end up the majority & the schools that actually help keep the conference semi-respectable end up having to make sacrifices.

Not the least of which is RPI.

 

[bearister]

What about the players? A BSC tourney with 12 teams at a predetermined site gives them no incentive to make the extra effort Griz made to win the league this year. Players want to play in front of large numbers of their own fans. A predetermined site, especially a neutral one, will guarantee that the atmosphere we saw Saturday night will not be repeated. The BSC is not a bus league. Travel costs come with the meal. If you polled the players, I bet 99 percent would vote to have a shot at playing at home.

 

[EverettGriz]

What about the players? A BSC tourney with 12 teams at a predetermined site gives them no incentive to make the extra effort Griz made to win the league this year. Players want to play in front of large numbers of their own fans. A predetermined site, especially a neutral one, will guarantee that the atmosphere we saw Saturday night will not be repeated. The BSC is not a bus league. Travel costs come with the meal. If you polled the players, I bet 99 percent would vote to have a shot at playing at home.

C'mon bearister. How naive you must be to believe the bsc conference has the best interest of its student-athletes at the heart of any decision....

 

[G-BEARS]

I absolutely hate the idea of a preselected site. It takes all of the incentive out of the regular season. Sure, you're still playing the regular season to make the top 8 to make the tournament but when was the last time the griz weren't in the top 8? And I don't want to hear that we're playing for seeding. Honestly, in a small 8 team tournament seeding doesn't mean shit. Take this year for example, we were the 1 seed and had to play Weber, arguably the team with the most raw talent in the conference. Once you're in the tournament seeding doesn't matter. In order to win the thing, you've got to beat the best teams. Not living in Missoula, I usually make it to 4 or 5 regular season games a year. With a preselected site, I see this number dropping. I won't be interested or care about conference play at all until the tournament. This year was awesome, every game mattered, we had something to play for in the regular season. It meant something. I think that if this decision goes through, it won't only hurt attendances of the conference tournament, but the regular season conference play as well.

 

[PlayerRep]

I absolutely hate the idea of a preselected site. It takes all of the incentive out of the regular season. Sure, you're still playing the regular season to make the top 8 to make the tournament but when was the last time the griz weren't in the top 8? And I don't want to hear that we're playing for seeding. Honestly, in a small 8 team tournament seeding doesn't mean shit. Take this year for example, we were the 1 seed and had to play Weber, arguably the team with the most raw talent in the conference. Once you're in the tournament seeding doesn't matter. In order to win the thing, you've got to beat the best teams. Not living in Missoula, I usually make it to 4 or 5 regular season games a year. With a preselected site, I see this number dropping. I won't be interested or care about conference play at all until the tournament. This year was awesome, every game mattered, we had something to play for in the regular season. It meant something. I think that if this decision goes through, it won't only hurt attendances of the conference tournament, but the regular season conference play as well.

I agree with you. Well-written post. I'm not sure about regular season conference attendance dropping, or dropping much, but you may be right there too. You are certainly right about yourself having a bit less interest, so I suppose that proves your point. I make a similar argument with UM football, and the importance of every game for playoff selection and seeding. Every football game, no matter who the opponent is, is critical for playoff seeding. And that causes some fans, including myself, to make every effort to attend every game.

 

[PlayerRep]

What about the players? A BSC tourney with 12 teams at a predetermined site gives them no incentive to make the extra effort Griz made to win the league this year. Players want to play in front of large numbers of their own fans. A predetermined site, especially a neutral one, will guarantee that the atmosphere we saw Saturday night will not be repeated. The BSC is not a bus league. Travel costs come with the meal. If you polled the players, I bet 99 percent would vote to have a shot at playing at home.

C'mon bearister. How naive you must be to believe the bsc conference has the best interest of its student-athletes at the heart of any decision....

Do any conferences really have the best interests of student-athletes at the heart of decisions? Aren't almost all athletic department/school decisions much more complicated than that?

 

[grizindabox]

What about the players? A BSC tourney with 12 teams at a predetermined site gives them no incentive to make the extra effort Griz made to win the league this year. Players want to play in front of large numbers of their own fans. A predetermined site, especially a neutral one, will guarantee that the atmosphere we saw Saturday night will not be repeated. The BSC is not a bus league. Travel costs come with the meal. If you polled the players, I bet 99 percent would vote to have a shot at playing at home.

C'mon bearister. How naive you must be to believe the bsc conference has the best interest of its student-athletes at the heart of any decision....

Do any conferences really have the best interests of student-athletes at the heart of decisions? Aren't almost all athletic department/school decisions much more complicated than that?

Not sure how a predetermined site is any bigger hardship on the student-athlete than the Conference winner hosting?