It is being reported on the Idaho message board that the conference voted today to move the Big Sky tournament to Las Vegas in 2016. I can't find any links or official announcement so this may have just been a preliminary vote of ADs, who would then recommend it to the Presidents. We shall see.
-
Hi Guest,
We've updated the site to combine all the forums that were part of the Big Sky Fans Network into one location. This will make it easier to navigate and participate in all the discussions for each school without having to have multiple accounts, etc. We are still working out some tweaks but please let us know if you notice anything.
With the migration, in some circumstances, your username could have been merged with one of your other usernames from the other forums. If this is the case, you can request to change your username in your account details page of your profile. -
Hi Guest, want to participate in the discussions, keep track of read/unread posts and more? Create your free account and increase the benefits of your eGriz.com experience today!
-
Guest, do want an ad free experience on BigSkyFans.com among other benefits? Upgrade your account today!
Simply click your profile name > account upgrades > BigSky Club > choose between the year long subscription (two free months) or month to month
Thanks for the continued support. Cheers!
BIg Sky Tourney to Vegas?
- Thread starter Skippy
- Start date
oldrunner
Active member
I don't like the idea either. However, I can see how schools with limited resources to host the event, might be in favor of it. The way I understand it, to host, a school must win the regular season, and commit a certain amount of cash to the BSC or give up their right to host. So, to break even, a school would have to sell enough advertising and seats to cover the costs. About half of the teams, and most of the new teams, don't have the resources to break even, another quarter could break even, and about a quarter can make a profit on the deal. That is the way I believe it is structured now. Vegas could be offering to cover the cost of hosting in hopes of getting a lot of gambling customers.
Before they did something like that, for the money, I would hope that they would put it up for bid. If they want it to be a neutral floor, at least consider other options. Vegas only seems convenient for the southern teams. Not so much for the northern schools.
Before they did something like that, for the money, I would hope that they would put it up for bid. If they want it to be a neutral floor, at least consider other options. Vegas only seems convenient for the southern teams. Not so much for the northern schools.
Purple_Posse
Active member
BSC does not travel well. Let the regular season champ host the tourney.
SWeberCat02
Active member
I kind of like it. I would plan a trip to Vegas every year, where as if the tournament was held at any other school I would probably never attend.
Biggest reason why this is a terrible idea...did anyone watch the WAC tournament? Notice the arena they were playing it in? IT WAS EMPTY!! Yes, that is what we want from the Sky, a chance to show case an empty stadium in Las Vegas on ESPNU. Brilliant plan!!
Biggest reason why the Dee was empty, in places, this year was because of poor marketing and a seating plan created by the conference that was akin to three monkey's scratching each other's asses. Let the schools sell their own tickets. Get the conference out of the equation.
This is a terrible idea. Absolutely terrible. If the tournament is sucking funds then it is time to cut it. The Sky is a 1 bid conference, the regular season champ should represent. If there is a tie, then have a playoff at a neutral location.
Biggest reason why the Dee was empty, in places, this year was because of poor marketing and a seating plan created by the conference that was akin to three monkey's scratching each other's asses. Let the schools sell their own tickets. Get the conference out of the equation.
This is a terrible idea. Absolutely terrible. If the tournament is sucking funds then it is time to cut it. The Sky is a 1 bid conference, the regular season champ should represent. If there is a tie, then have a playoff at a neutral location.
SWeberCat02
Active member
I still question this actually happened though. Nothing anywhere on the internet or Twitter and the idaho fans claim their school got a vote, which is unlikely since they aren't official members yet.
I absolutely hate this idea. NO Way in HELL would the Sky out draw the other FOUR CONFERENCES having tournaments in the same city, on the same days. The Sky would be on par with one of them however, the WAC = EMPTY STADIUM.
Why was Dahlberg full two years ago? Because Montana told the conference to kiss their asses and they took over the seating arrangement and sell of tickets. They didn't follow the conference model. I was an away fan and was treated well, and got the tickets I wanted. It was a great experience other than the Cats losing the game. One of the best I have ever watched.
Biggest reason for the smallish crowd at the Dee this season? 1. DREADFUL MARKETING by Weber State and the Sky. 2. Fear that the Cats would lose again. In 2010 the Dee had 10,500 at the Championship to watch AJ go off and score 42. 3. The seating plan created by the conference is a joke. 4. Spring Break was the same week and there wasn't any student marketing either so it wouldn't matter.
I loved the games this past year. It was three awesome days of basketball. I watched them all. Made new friends from other schools and had a great time watching my Cats win the Sky. If the conference HAS to have a tournament, the regular season champion should have the right to host, no matter who wins. They won...they should host. Even if it is in Greeley, Bozeman, or Poky. That team should have the best chance to claiming the ONLY spot allowed to the Big Sky in the Big Dance. If that school can't win on their home floor, with its fans, and being at home, then that is their fault. They have the advantages.
Last time the tournament was at a "neutral"/prearranged location. 1994 in Boise. Sixth seeded Boise State represented the Sky at the Dance. #1 seed Weber State, lost in the first round to Boise, and went home early. The Cats should have hosted that tournament and should have gone dancing. That team did the next year and beat Michigan State. Who knows what they could have done as Jrs. but we will never know because Weber wasn't able to represent the Sky in the Dance, instead, the Sky got the 6th seeded Broncos.
Why was Dahlberg full two years ago? Because Montana told the conference to kiss their asses and they took over the seating arrangement and sell of tickets. They didn't follow the conference model. I was an away fan and was treated well, and got the tickets I wanted. It was a great experience other than the Cats losing the game. One of the best I have ever watched.
Biggest reason for the smallish crowd at the Dee this season? 1. DREADFUL MARKETING by Weber State and the Sky. 2. Fear that the Cats would lose again. In 2010 the Dee had 10,500 at the Championship to watch AJ go off and score 42. 3. The seating plan created by the conference is a joke. 4. Spring Break was the same week and there wasn't any student marketing either so it wouldn't matter.
I loved the games this past year. It was three awesome days of basketball. I watched them all. Made new friends from other schools and had a great time watching my Cats win the Sky. If the conference HAS to have a tournament, the regular season champion should have the right to host, no matter who wins. They won...they should host. Even if it is in Greeley, Bozeman, or Poky. That team should have the best chance to claiming the ONLY spot allowed to the Big Sky in the Big Dance. If that school can't win on their home floor, with its fans, and being at home, then that is their fault. They have the advantages.
Last time the tournament was at a "neutral"/prearranged location. 1994 in Boise. Sixth seeded Boise State represented the Sky at the Dance. #1 seed Weber State, lost in the first round to Boise, and went home early. The Cats should have hosted that tournament and should have gone dancing. That team did the next year and beat Michigan State. Who knows what they could have done as Jrs. but we will never know because Weber wasn't able to represent the Sky in the Dance, instead, the Sky got the 6th seeded Broncos.
oldrunner
Active member
If they rotated it between NBA venues or held it at the NBA venue closest to the regular season champion, it might be a little more palatable. However, that would still be too far for some teams and would, ultimately, be a slap to them.
The only truly fair way to do it is to leave it as it is now.
The only truly fair way to do it is to leave it as it is now.
Webergrad02
Active member
Don't fix it if it is not broken. One of the major concerns is that Sac may not have an available venue if the they were selected to host the tourney in the next year or so.
I do think we should have a pre-season tourney in Vegas. Take the top 3 programs from the Big Sky and the top 3 programs from the Big West. Have three days of teams playing the teams from the other conference. If you had it in Vegas it would be an easy drive from the LA area. Invite NAU, Weber and Sac. Although Montana may travel a little better than Sac.
I do think we should have a pre-season tourney in Vegas. Take the top 3 programs from the Big Sky and the top 3 programs from the Big West. Have three days of teams playing the teams from the other conference. If you had it in Vegas it would be an easy drive from the LA area. Invite NAU, Weber and Sac. Although Montana may travel a little better than Sac.
oldrunner
Active member
That's not a bad idea, '02. However, you might not be able to make the 'Top Teams' idea fly very far. I think that sort of thing would have to benefit all teams in both leagues equally or the leagues wouldn't go for it. 6 teams, 3 games over a long weekend sounds great. A team would only be in it every third or fourth year. That would give plenty of room for keeping a diverse schedule.
Webergrad02
Active member
All of the Big West teams with the exception of Hawaii could travel easily to Vegas. In the Big Sky, it would be more of a trek. Do North Dakotians frequent Vegas? I always loved to see the drunk Wyoming fans at the MWC tournament giving BYU the business.
Wildcat_Fan
Active member
The only thing I can think of is that Vegas will pay the conference more money than the fees for the schools to host. I think it is around 100,000 or 150 for a team to host and then whatever they make ontop they keep. I bet vegas is willing to pay more than that and hoping that fans and alumni will spend more in vegas to make up for that. So if the sky is looking at it from a money perspective they would be dumb not to go for it, but it would screw the rest of us fans in the process. :wall:
Also I think anyone can host the tournament right now they just have to be able to seat so many people. Like when portland had to move the games to the rose garden to host. I would assume Sac would just go to where the kings play or somewhere close to that.
Also I think anyone can host the tournament right now they just have to be able to seat so many people. Like when portland had to move the games to the rose garden to host. I would assume Sac would just go to where the kings play or somewhere close to that.
oldrunner
Active member
It should be noted that many coaches are in favor of moving to an all inclusive format due to the high number of coaches who get canned for not making the tournament. In general, coaches don't like to see other coaches canned and they certainly don't want to be canned themselves.
As a fan, I don't think that I would want to take a whole week off of work to attend this thing in Vegas. I might attend the semis and final, if my team is in it. I might even be talked into quarter finals if conditions were right.
As a fan, I don't think that I would want to take a whole week off of work to attend this thing in Vegas. I might attend the semis and final, if my team is in it. I might even be talked into quarter finals if conditions were right.
oldrunner
Active member
Here is how it could go:
5 First Round games on home floors. First and second get a bye
5 winning teams plus the second place team are in the second round at neutral site.
3 winning teams plus the first place team are in QTR finals.
2 winning teams are in the final.
Three nights at the neutral site!!! :thumb: :thumb:
5 First Round games on home floors. First and second get a bye
5 winning teams plus the second place team are in the second round at neutral site.
3 winning teams plus the first place team are in QTR finals.
2 winning teams are in the final.
Three nights at the neutral site!!! :thumb: :thumb:
oldrunner
Active member
I don't think that I would be booking way in advance in any circumstance. Also, 4 nights in a row is too much for my butt to endure. My wife wouldn't do it.
I don't even think that teams would book far enough in advance to make any difference there. Maybe the league would do all the booking and then dole them out as needed. Any way I look at it, the attendance is going to be poor and that may not be the image we want for the BSC or our individual schools.
I don't even think that teams would book far enough in advance to make any difference there. Maybe the league would do all the booking and then dole them out as needed. Any way I look at it, the attendance is going to be poor and that may not be the image we want for the BSC or our individual schools.
Bengal visitor said:
Bengal, you always have good things to add, so please don't take this comment as offensive or challenging...biggest reason why this is happening, Vegas or someone, is paying off the league. What is ultimately going to happen is a tournament where the stadium is empty. Even with knowing the date, schools still won't send cheerleaders, band, or won't travel well. This is a terrible idea, and will only show the nation how bad the Big Sky really is.
