BIg Sky Tourney to Vegas?

[SactoHornetAlum]

I get it...it is expensive for fans and programs to travel at such a late notice. Getting time off of work is bugger, but lets look at the real issue. Who cares if opposing team fans can make it or not? If they can, great, come on over to wherever the tournament is being played and enjoy three days of basketball. If not...well, YOUR TEAM DIDN'T WIN the right to host. The regular season winner should have those advantages. Being able to stay in their beds, being in their city, and having a sold out arena with a very partisan and supportive crowd.

Empty stadiums in Vegas isn't the answer.

Final thought...if you aren't one of the top 7 teams in the conference then your season is over. The regular season should represent something. The Sky is not the PAC-12. We only get 1 team into the Dance. That team should be the team that wins it all in the regular season. If We HAVE to have a conference tournament, then it should favor that regular season winner. HELL, a couple years ago, the conference wanted to help UNCO sooo badly that even the refs helped them beat UM in the championship game. UNCO was after all the regular season winner. They deserved to host and go to the Dance. If they play in Vegas...they lose in front of 200 fans.

Sac fans are use to 200 fans watching a game and aren't embarrassed by empty stadiums on ESPN. Weber fans...not so much.

You know what, we won the WAC regular season baseball title this year. The WAC Tournament was held at Cubs Park in Mesa, AZ. We won that too as the top seed. Away from home. So if you are that good in your conference, you're going to win. Period. No matter where it's held. We brought 300 fans down there. That's pretty damn good for college baseball.

Because of the aura of March Madness, I guarantee we will show up with more fans at a place like Vegas for chance at the NCAA's. Our fans were starting to buy in after watching our team this season. We will travel, give us a reason to do so. I think Weber fans would travel well to Vegas for hoops because of the success of your program.

 

[SDHornet]

If there has to be a pre-determined site, rotating it among the top Big Sky stadiums/cities would be better than just doing it in Vegas.

By the way...did you watch the WAC Championship? It was a pretty pathetic scene thar in Vegas.

Class?? Well, at least this isn't EGRIZ!! :nod:

Yup. That is what the BSC should expect. If the BSC can live with that and/or it is still financially viable then they may decide it is worth it.

I see your point SD...I get it, the Sky wants to make or save more $$$ for the conference and its partners (teams), but at what cost? The BSC shouldn't be willing and fine with trading possible/relative financial viability for empty stadiums and embarrassing nationally broadcast games. The Sky should be doing more to enhance its product.

To me the real comparison is this:

Costs/revenue from having it at a neutral location. This takes into consideration everyone’s (24 teams) expenses for lodging, per diem, travel (bus or flight).

VS:

Costs/revenue from having the BSC take control of hosting at the regular season champs’ campus including the cost of (7/8 teams) travel, lodging, and per diem…then double it to include costs of the women’s BSCT location.

Under my second scenario, this means now the BSC takes control, they cover the costs, control marketing, having complete control over how its run and organized. I understand the BSC just embezzles funds from the host in the current form, this needs to change and the BSC need to assume control and responsibility of costs and revenue if it is kept on campus.

So after all of that which would be better for the BSC as a whole from a financial standpoint? Logistically the easier option is the neutral site. But does it make sense (cents?) financially?

 

[sacstateman]

OK OK I get it....Let's all agree to have the tournament at the Dee Center every year and maybe the majority of this forum will be happy.

 

[WeberSki]

I get it...it is expensive for fans and programs to travel at such a late notice. Getting time off of work is bugger, but lets look at the real issue. Who cares if opposing team fans can make it or not? If they can, great, come on over to wherever the tournament is being played and enjoy three days of basketball. If not...well, YOUR TEAM DIDN'T WIN the right to host. The regular season winner should have those advantages. Being able to stay in their beds, being in their city, and having a sold out arena with a very partisan and supportive crowd.

Empty stadiums in Vegas isn't the answer.

Final thought...if you aren't one of the top 7 teams in the conference then your season is over. The regular season should represent something. The Sky is not the PAC-12. We only get 1 team into the Dance. That team should be the team that wins it all in the regular season. If We HAVE to have a conference tournament, then it should favor that regular season winner. HELL, a couple years ago, the conference wanted to help UNCO sooo badly that even the refs helped them beat UM in the championship game. UNCO was after all the regular season winner. They deserved to host and go to the Dance. If they play in Vegas...they lose in front of 200 fans.

Sac fans are use to 200 fans watching a game and aren't embarrassed by empty stadiums on ESPN. Weber fans...not so much.

You know what, we won the WAC regular season baseball title this year. The WAC Tournament was held at Cubs Park in Mesa, AZ. We won that too as the top seed. Away from home. So if you are that good in your conference, you're going to win. Period. No matter where it's held. We brought 300 fans down there. That's pretty damn good for college baseball.

Because of the aura of March Madness, I guarantee we will show up with more fans at a place like Vegas for chance at the NCAA's. Our fans were starting to buy in after watching our team this season. We will travel, give us a reason to do so. I think Weber fans would travel well to Vegas for hoops because of the success of your program.

Are you really trying to compare home team advantage between baseball & basketball? :wall:

Also, When Northern Colorado hosted 4 years ago. Weber FLEW to the tourney. NoCo can do what they want, but don't whine about it later.

 

[SactoHornetAlum]

I get it...it is expensive for fans and programs to travel at such a late notice. Getting time off of work is bugger, but lets look at the real issue. Who cares if opposing team fans can make it or not? If they can, great, come on over to wherever the tournament is being played and enjoy three days of basketball. If not...well, YOUR TEAM DIDN'T WIN the right to host. The regular season winner should have those advantages. Being able to stay in their beds, being in their city, and having a sold out arena with a very partisan and supportive crowd.

Empty stadiums in Vegas isn't the answer.

Final thought...if you aren't one of the top 7 teams in the conference then your season is over. The regular season should represent something. The Sky is not the PAC-12. We only get 1 team into the Dance. That team should be the team that wins it all in the regular season. If We HAVE to have a conference tournament, then it should favor that regular season winner. HELL, a couple years ago, the conference wanted to help UNCO sooo badly that even the refs helped them beat UM in the championship game. UNCO was after all the regular season winner. They deserved to host and go to the Dance. If they play in Vegas...they lose in front of 200 fans.

Sac fans are use to 200 fans watching a game and aren't embarrassed by empty stadiums on ESPN. Weber fans...not so much.

You know what, we won the WAC regular season baseball title this year. The WAC Tournament was held at Cubs Park in Mesa, AZ. We won that too as the top seed. Away from home. So if you are that good in your conference, you're going to win. Period. No matter where it's held. We brought 300 fans down there. That's pretty damn good for college baseball.

Because of the aura of March Madness, I guarantee we will show up with more fans at a place like Vegas for chance at the NCAA's. Our fans were starting to buy in after watching our team this season. We will travel, give us a reason to do so. I think Weber fans would travel well to Vegas for hoops because of the success of your program.

Are you really trying to compare home team advantage between baseball & basketball? :wall:

Also, When Northern Colorado hosted 4 years ago. Weber FLEW to the tourney. NoCo can do what they want, but don't whine about it later.

What I am saying is the WAC Tournament was a predetermined site. And because of the all defections taking most of the good baseball programs, the WAC for baseball has now become a one-bid league. So everyone knew beforehand. We went out and took care of business. Didn't whine or complain. And our fans enjoyed the experience at beautiful Spring Training ballpark two weeks ago.

And about homefield advantage: the Hornets were 24-8 between John Smith Field and Raley Field this year. Our away/neutral site record was 16-16. So clearly we had a great home season. But we took care of business. No matter where we played.

 

[Webergrad02]

OK OK I get it....Let's all agree to have the tournament at the Dee Center every year and maybe the majority of this forum will be happy.

You are the one posting on our forum. We average 6,500 fans per game. We enjoy our home court and we work hard for it. We all know that just because we host doesn't mean we will win. We are just saying that the previous format has done a decent job of getting the best team to the dance.

Lets take this year as an example. If the tournament was in Vegas, I estimate that fans would have traveled accordingly.
Weber - 400 fans
North Dakota - 50 fans
Northern Arizona - 200 fans
Montana - 100 fans
PSU - 50 fans
UNC -100 fans
Sac - 100 fans

100 basketball lovers with nothing better to do will come off the street.

That's 1,100 fans total for all sessions

In the championship
You have Webers 400 + UND's 50 + 100 from the other schools that figure they should hang around + the 100 from the street.

The grand total 650 fans repping the BIG SKY on ESPN!

 

[wsucatfan]

OK OK I get it....Let's all agree to have the tournament at the Dee Center every year and maybe the majority of this forum will be happy.

That's our team's goal every year.

 

[PURPLEFORLIFE]

OK OK I get it....Let's all agree to have the tournament at the Dee Center every year and maybe the majority of this forum will be happy.

Sounds good to me.

 

[WSUfan1]

If Sac St. fans want a predetermined host site, let's just make it the DEC here in Ogden. If what they are saying is true, "if you're the best team, you should win the tournament regardless of location." If the DEC was the host site, WSU would win the dang think 90% of the time, regardless of seeding. (Sac. St. will never win a championship) Look at what happened to WSU as reg. season champs having to play in Boise years back. Host the dang thing here in Ogden, hotels, food and nice facility here. Oh, and fans are here too...

 

[WILDCAT]

OK OK I get it....Let's all agree to have the tournament at the Dee Center every year and maybe the majority of this forum will be happy.

That's our team's goal every year.

:+1: :clap: :nod: :notworthy:

That's what made the conference race worth something

If the whole idea is improving the Conference's image, empty Arena's in Vegas is not the way to do it, look at the last few years, Montana has had great crowds at thier Hosted championship games, Weber's was big and loud last year, heck Northern Colorado's gym hardly holds anybody, but it was packed and in your face loud. That is much better than the echoes you would hear at a arena in Vegas.

 

[Webergrad02]

The Southpoint arena is essentially an equestrian arena converted into a basketball space. It reminds me of a smaller version of Holt Arena. Fans are away from the action and part of the space is blocked off. We are already limiting students by moving it to Vegas. Now lets really take the fans out by moving them 50 feet off the court. Is this how we want our conference represented? Several of our current arenas are better than this.

 

[sasquatch]

Billings as a possible location. That's a joke right? I would rather have the tournament in Doug Fullerton's backyard on the East bench. The Big Sky really does have a dog in the fight. They have to say that but they benefit when the tournament is in Ogden.

Actually, if I was going to look for a neutral location, this is exactly the line of thinking I'd pursue. Not saying Billings is the ideal - who knows what kind of airport deals there are - but they have a nice arena and it's within a region which has Big Sky interest (i.e. an area with Big Sky alumni).

By that same reasoning, I'd also look at cities like Salt Lake, Boise, Tacoma, Spokane, Tri-Cities, St. George, and Reno. Vegas is Vegas. It's a UNLV (MWC) town first, Pac-12 second. The WCC has done well there because of Gonzaga and the California schools like San Diego, Loyola, Pepperdine - the schools which can drive to Vegas. If attendance is the most important thing to you, you'd probably have better luck getting it from smaller cities in which the Big Sky Tournament is THE event.

The WAC is apparently not thrilled with Vegas either. A Phoenix TV station reported the WAC's Ads are split 4-4 over moving their tourney to Phoenix over lousy attendance in Vegas. Let the debate continue...

I Googled this, and the Las Cruces paper has a story about it. The New Mexico State AD voted for Vegas, and he worries that if the WAC goes to Phoenix, they'll lose their future reserved dates at the Orleans. So.... I'm guessing if this is the case, then the Big Sky could move into the Orleans if Vegas is determined to be the only option.

http://www.lcsun-news.com/las_cruces-sports/ci_25852202/nmsu-athletics-aggie-athletics-director-mckinley-boston-attends" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

 

[SDHornet]

From the Las Cruces Sun article linked above:

The conference has reserved dates in March at the Orleans Arena in Las Vegas as well, Hurd said. The Orleans has hosted the tournament since 2010, but attendance has lacked as the WAC has deteriorated as a basketball conference.

"If we do leave Las Vegas, it's likely we would lose those dates we do have locked in the future," Hurd said. "We have a good relationship with the facility in Las Vegas. They know us and we know them, so that has been a positive.

"On the negative side, we haven't attracted fans in the number that we would like but there is no guarantee we would do that in any other location either."

Seems like the BSC decision makers just need to look at the recent WAC Vegas tourney to get an idea of what there is to gain/lose. If Vegas is working so well for them, why is the WAC considering moving it to PHX?

 

[WILDCAT]

From the Las Cruces Sun article linked above:

The conference has reserved dates in March at the Orleans Arena in Las Vegas as well, Hurd said. The Orleans has hosted the tournament since 2010, but attendance has lacked as the WAC has deteriorated as a basketball conference.

"If we do leave Las Vegas, it's likely we would lose those dates we do have locked in the future," Hurd said. "We have a good relationship with the facility in Las Vegas. They know us and we know them, so that has been a positive.

"On the negative side, we haven't attracted fans in the number that we would like but there is no guarantee we would do that in any other location either."

Seems like the BSC decision makers just need to look at the recent WAC Vegas tourney to get an idea of what there is to gain/lose. If Vegas is working so well for them, why is the WAC considering moving it to PHX?

Very good question, maybe Phoenix was asking for less money?

 

[SactoHornetAlum]

From the Las Cruces Sun article linked above:

The conference has reserved dates in March at the Orleans Arena in Las Vegas as well, Hurd said. The Orleans has hosted the tournament since 2010, but attendance has lacked as the WAC has deteriorated as a basketball conference.

"If we do leave Las Vegas, it's likely we would lose those dates we do have locked in the future," Hurd said. "We have a good relationship with the facility in Las Vegas. They know us and we know them, so that has been a positive.

"On the negative side, we haven't attracted fans in the number that we would like but there is no guarantee we would do that in any other location either."

Seems like the BSC decision makers just need to look at the recent WAC Vegas tourney to get an idea of what there is to gain/lose. If Vegas is working so well for them, why is the WAC considering moving it to PHX?

The WAC had crappy attendance because look at the schools in that conference now! It's a joke outside of NMSU and somewhat now UVU. It's become the throw-out-the-trash league. hno:

 

[Webergrad02]

I know that myth busters proved it was possible, but you can't polish a turd. Even though the WAC tournament was in Vegas, it is still a turd of league. You can move the tournament anywhere and it will still be the same.

I like that the conference wants to first look at strengthening the league as a whole. Then maybe worry about the tournament. Pre-1999, the Big Sky and WCC were fairly similar one bid leagues in Mens B-Ball. Every once in a while a really good team would surface from one of the leagues (LMU in the early 90s). But overall the leagues were evenly matched. Before 99, Gonzaga had one tournament appearance, since then they haven't missed. They changed the basketball culture at their school first and as a result, the WCC is a stronger league. A rising tide will raise all the ships in the harbor. Gonzaga started loading up the non-conference schedule and has created something special.

 

[oldrunner]

I'm 100% behind you '02. The day will come that the BSC gets more than one team in, when the overall level of perceived play improves. There are many factors that go into that and all of them should be pushed by the league. I think that the level of play has been quite good in the BSC lately. Every school in the league needs to fight hard to attack this issue on all levels. Yes, it is hard, and yes, it takes commitment and money, but the league should not stop pushing, ever. It would be great if we got some help from the NCAA or other leagues, but we have to push along as if we were never going to get any help.

 

[SDHornet]

I know that myth busters proved it was possible, but you can't polish a turd. Even though the WAC tournament was in Vegas, it is still a turd of league. You can move the tournament anywhere and it will still be the same.

I like that the conference wants to first look at strengthening the league as a whole. Then maybe worry about the tournament. Pre-1999, the Big Sky and WCC were fairly similar one bid leagues in Mens B-Ball. Every once in a while a really good team would surface from one of the leagues (LMU in the early 90s). But overall the leagues were evenly matched. Before 99, Gonzaga had one tournament appearance, since then they haven't missed. They changed the basketball culture at their school first and as a result, the WCC is a stronger league. A rising tide will raise all the ships in the harbor. Gonzaga started loading up the non-conference schedule and has created something special.

I think GCU will serve in a similar role to the WAC. GCU has money to spend, and so far they haven’t hesitated to use it on athletics.

 

[SDHornet]

The WAC had crappy attendance because look at the schools in that conference now! It's a joke outside of NMSU and somewhat now UVU. It's become the throw-out-the-trash league. hno:

I would like to believe a lot of BSC fans would make the trip to Vegas (I know I would) but I don’t think the BSCT attendance would be much different than what the WAC saw this past few years.

2012 WACT: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2012_WAC_Men's_Basketball_Tournament" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Of the 4 games with attendance listed, the WAC averaged 1,870, with only 1,405 showing up for the final.

I couldn’t even find attendance numbers for their 2013 tourney.

EDIT: 1,518 showed up for the NMSU-Idaho WAC final this past season...so we know Idaho fans won't make the trip to Vegas.
http://espn.go.com/ncb/boxscore?gameId=400546781

 

[Skippy]

I think everybody has come to terms with the fact that a pre-determined site like Vegas is not going to draw flies. There are only three schools in the Big Sky who average more than 2,000 fans a game during the regular season (Weber, Montana and Montana State), and unless the pre-determined site is located in close proximity to one of those three schools (Salt Lake City, Spokane, Billings, etc.), it's not going to draw more than 1,500 to 2,000 fans. It's also a given that a pre-determined, off-campus site is going to cost the conference schools money.

So the question then becomes are you willing to give Weber or the Montana schools a psuedo-home court advantage in order to encourage attendance and to maybe break even financially?

I understand the coaches are the ones pushing hard for a pre-determined site to better accommodate travel, but the more I think about this, the more I'm convinced it's not going to happen. I've heard Vegas is already out of the running since there are no acceptable venues open. I think when the conference looks into the costs of other "neutral" venues, the presidents will decide they like it just the way it is.