Big Sky Conference- why have ratings dropped so far?

[heyoh22]

Did a little surfing thru Conference results in the past on kenpom blog and stats. The BSC has been dropping over the past years, here are the rankings and statistical ratings for a few recent years.

2003 Ranked 19, rating .4169
in 2007: 22, .3327
in 2009: 22, .3525
in 2010: 19th, .3712
in 2011: 23rd, .3106
in 2012: 28th, .2761

So far for 2013:
Ranked 28, rating: .2842

Has the quality of play dropped so much? What gets the BSC into mid pack in the future?
:wall:

 

[Skippy]

Did a little surfing thru Conference results in the past on kenpom blog and stats. The BSC has been dropping over the past years, here are the rankings and statistical ratings for a few recent years.

2003 Ranked 19, rating .4169
in 2007: 22, .3327
in 2009: 22, .3525
in 2010: 19th, .3712
in 2011: 23rd, .3106
in 2012: 28th, .2761

So far for 2013:
Ranked 28, rating: .2842

Has the quality of play dropped so much? What gets the BSC into mid pack in the future?
:wall:

Yes, the quality of play has dropped considerably. Just look at this year's non-conference performance -- two teams with winning records -- a combined 3 games over .500. Only one impressive win in the league so far -- Weber's victory at Dayton. A lot of "bad" losses by BSC teams. No team or individual player to get overly excited about.

What will it take to raise the league back up? Good coaching hires and recruiting. No secrets there. One thing a lot of people don't appreciate is the fact there are now 350 D-1 teams in the country. 25 years ago, there were about 200. So the talent is spread much thinner and competition for recruits is much more intense. Bill Evans is finding out just how difficult it is to recruit the few good Idaho kids. He lost Cannon and Fuller to Weber, and the Wilkinson kid from Pocatello (whose dad, Dale, played for ISU in the 1980s) is looking elsewhere. 30 years ago, ISU probably would have landed two or all three of those kids, and they would have made them pretty competitive. Not anymore.

There are a lot of bad basketball players on D-1 scholarships these days. And a lot of them are in the Big Sky Conference.

 

[weberwildcat]

Another one isu lost was nick Hansen. He was a sold big sky player. Streaky three point specialist that hit as many as 7 in a game during the rahe era. Another guy recently was at sjsu from poca that was pretty good.

 

[weberwildcat]

Two obvious flaws to this year's weaker sky other than many of the teams aren't looking so great at this point are...

1. Losing 4 ooc games each because of additions suu and und. Odds are the 4 games each team would have played this yr would have been better teams than suu and und.

2. Suu and und.

These are both long term changes so one can hope suu and und won't be bad teams each yr. Adding Idaho will be better when they join.

Playing 20 conf games vs #28 vs playing 16 is a big change. In 2006 we only played 14 conf games.

 

[Skippy]

The good news is that when Idaho joins the conference, they will go to divisions and go back to 16 conference games. The bad news is it doesn't matter how many opportunities you have to play "better" non-conference teams if you can't win those games. If Weber wants to be taken seriously, it has to win home games against teams like BYU. If Montana wants to get a decent seed in the NCAA, they have to beat San Francisco on the road. Just because you give mediocre non-conference teams a game doesn't entitle you to a high seed or RPI. Sooner or later, you have to win those games.

 

[AlumniWSU]

The good news is that when Idaho joins the conference, they will go to divisions and go back to 16 conference games. The bad news is it doesn't matter how many opportunities you have to play "better" non-conference teams if you can't win those games. If Weber wants to be taken seriously, it has to win home games against teams like BYU. If Montana wants to get a decent seed in the NCAA, they have to beat San Francisco on the road. Just because you give mediocre non-conference teams a game doesn't entitle you to a high seed or RPI. Sooner or later, you have to win those games.

Right On...AND you have to win those games more often than once in a great while! I also think the BSC school's ADs & HCs need to have attitudes of higher competitiveness (or expectations). Thinkin' the 'Sky is just a bush league & stepping stone for a job at a bigger program isn't helpful. To "Aim Higher" is fine, but do it by raising values NOW at the BSC! I as a fan was offended years ago when Weber's somewhat successful HC (in national non-conf play) left for NMSU and was quoted as saying that he would really have to ratchet up his recruiting now. REALLY?! I believe the lucky finds are out there & a role as a big fish in a small pond isn't a bad thing (ex. Lillard). Comeon!--be competitive in selecting coaches who succeed in selling the chance to play in the BSC and if earned, they move on up...what 'Sky school wouldn't like a few fine years of winning big then wishing a coach well at parting to higher profile?! (And maybe hire an assistant for a chance to continue the success?)

 

[oldrunner]

The BSC needs to put real presure on it's members to upgrade facilities. We have a few gyms around the league that wouldn't be acceptable as Jr High gyms around Utah. I don't mean a 5 year plan either. I'm talking a 2 or 3 year plan to have all of our BB facilities up to at least what Salt Lake Community College has. I don't think that is too much to demand. Subsequently, recruiting and retention of coaches should improve. If all of those things get better, the league gets better. Start with something better than a playground to play in. It's really nice to fly into the capital city of a west coast state and then play in somebodies driveway. Come-on, BSC, get on the stick here.

 

[weberwildcat]

The BSC needs to put real presure on it's members to upgrade facilities. We have a few gyms around the league that wouldn't be acceptable as Jr High gyms around Utah. I don't mean a 5 year plan either. I'm talking a 2 or 3 year plan to have all of our BB facilities up to at least what Salt Lake Community College has. I don't think that is too much to demand. Subsequently, recruiting and retention of coaches should improve. If all of those things get better, the league gets better. Start with something better than a playground to play in. It's really nice to fly into the capital city of a west coast state and then play in somebodies driveway. Come-on, BSC, get on the stick here.

that is a good point. it is not hard to see a big part of weber's success is due to facilities. we have only had 7 losing seasons since the dee was built 35 seasons ago.

nau, sac, psu, isu are in need most. not sure what und has. psu has plans for a real nice 5,000 seat arena but not sure if/when it plans to get built.

nau and isu play in football domes. sac has the smallest gym in america - 1,200 seats. i have been to it.

the two schools with the best facilities are also the top 2 programs in the conf overall for wins, big sky titles...etc.

 

[n.ogdencat]

It's pretty easy. Less OCC games means less opportunities for $$$ games which means more road games which equals a lot of losses. However, even in preseason tournaments the Sky has looked awful. Eastern lost to UVU a team Weber dismantled, and the Eagles were supposed to be one of the better teams in the Sky this year. Embarrassing what is happening right now. But it only gets worse after Eastern. The rest of the Sky is piss poor.

 

[oldrunner]

It's only slightly worse than most years, and most of our teams have upgraded their respective schedules. The league simply needs more quality wins and the deck is stacked against us, ie; teams insisting on hiring and bringing their own refs with them. Once again, it's an NCAA issue that needs to be dealt with. Things aren't as bad as you might think in the BSC. :twocents:

 

[mt jack]

NAU has road games this year vs. U of Oregon, UNLV, U of Arizona, U of Colorado and BYU. They've upped the ante re: scheduling. NAU seems to be in no shape to win any of these contests but they're challenging themselves and one can hope playing in such environments pays off down the road.

The Lumberjacks will be better than they were last year. I'm predicting somewhere midle-of-the-pack. Weber and UM will be good. It's a crap shoot after that as to who steps up and competes.

So, I watched the Weber vs. BYU game. Does BYU bring their own refs everywhere they go or do they just get a LOT of calls in their favor?

 

[oldrunner]

We bring BSC refs to Provo when we play them there. Our refs just aren't willing to cheat to the same degree as WCC, PAC12, or MWC refs do. I think that they think it's a tryout for the bigger conf. LOL. Home & Home contracts are often that way. If you are going to their place for a 'money' game, and not a H&H, you will get WCC refs or some local, off duty cops/LDS bishops. If its a Money game, expect to get hosed.... just sayin.

Good luck, anyway. :thumb:

 

[n.ogdencat]

The refs on Saturday weren't the reason why Weber lost though. Weber should have won that game even though there were some highly questionable calls (Two charges especially the one in the second half where Weber would have taken the lead). Weber missed 11 FT's and shot 4-19 from the 3pt line. Tres and Scotty gotta show up every game. Scotty had, perhaps, the worst game of his career on Saturday. Missing the front end of two one for one's doesn't help matters either. Thats 4 points that usually happen that weren't there.

As far as the rest of the conference.

Good/solid
Weber
UM

Better
SAC - YES, they are better this year and have the best lineup in 7 years with Garrity, Carabjal, Eberhard, Dickson, and Veteto.
NAU - not a top team, but have improved a lot over last years squad and will only get better
EWU - once they figure things out and get Chiverton back the Eagles could end up being really good. They are young too.

 

[AlumniWSU]

Blaming the refs is common ground, too much so sometimes...yah, it influences things at times but the game results usually end up the same regardless. Small basketball facilities in Cal. are common...the non-bigs will answer you back with why bother? Their average attendance can be counted in the hundreds several times; they're not gonna gather a crowd for a basketball game that even a jr. high in Utah would in some games, it's lack of interest. It's the competitive quality of the basketball team & coaches product that counts most and the Big Sky is overall below it's mediocre average this year. It cycles and hopefully improves. Always nice to see 'Sky teams win a big one now and again, though. :thumb:

 

[oldrunner]

Build it and they will come.

Nobody wants to attend a game in a dark, dirty, rat hole. There are too many alternatives to expect people to put up with that kind of crap.

I didn't say they all had to build 12000 seat arenas. Something along the lines of what Salt Lake Community Colege has would be fine. It can even be multi purpose, like Swenson was for so many years.

To say that you have to get attendance first and then get a facility, is like asking people to come and eat your meals at the park untill you can get enough money to actually build a resteraunt.

Some of the venues around our league are not just old, they are dirty and disgusting. :thumbdown:

 

[AlumniWSU]

That's a downer for sure, oldrunner...only place I've been is ISU and it was a different experience, what with the basketball court on one side of the football field...assume the Bengals still play BB there (per catcat); they did move into a remodeled gym a few years back...maybe temp. thing? How about the Vandals,,,still in the Kibbie Dome? Must admit that the BB team I hope improves most in the Big Sky is ISU...loved the rivalry when they were doing well and their fans supported them big time when they were in Ogden...it was fun...makes the two hr drive worth it. It's more interesting & exciting when several 'Sky teams are flyin high!!!

 

[n.ogdencat]

Oldrunner makes a great point. How can you take some of the teams in our league seriously when they are playing in gyms similar to an LDS Stake Center.

If we can be happy about anything that occurred in the most recent round of expansion, it is nice knowing that the two teams just starting in the league both have nice facilities. Jon will have to report on UND, but from what I have seen of their gym it is fairly nice. Big? No, but a nice gym. Being in a better, more consistent league, could really help the Fighting Sioux (I think the whole name thing is rather ridiculous) and over time, they, since they are in a unique situation -flagship institution, only team in midwest from out league, excellent academics, and in an area with a rising population- could really help them. They are competitive on the gridiron, and hopefully that will affect their basketball too. As for SUU, no they haven't been the most successful team as of late, and when they were, it hasn't been consistent. However, the Centrum, their gym, automatically is the third best facility in the Sky. If you haven't caught a game there you really need to. Nice place!!

Good knowing that PSU is improving the Stott. Hope it happens. This is reminding me of when Sac kept pretending that the were going to build a new gym, which has still never happened. Gotta love the Hornet's Nest. But...even though both PSU and SAC have crappy gyms, they both have had relative success, well PSU has. SAC has had decent teams in the past, but nothing to note worthy. This might be their best team as a Big Sky school. Anyway, it just goes to show, that teams with crappy facilities can still be somewhat good. PSU has been to the dance twice in the past 10 years so...I just don't understand why Portland won't let the Vikings, a state institution, play their games in Memorial Colliseum.