Open Letter to BSC Adniniustrators

[oldrunner]

OK. You have made the leap and made some sweeping changes to the post season tournament. Now it is time for you to start planning for the success of those changes. failure to plan for success is planning for failure.

You think that you worked hard to make those changes, but the truth is that pales in comparison to the work it will take to make this a success.

Here are some suggestions that might have a positive impact.

1) Set some minimum standards for participating members. Minimum numbers of tickets sold. Minimum numbers for official traveling party, ie. bands, cheer squads, dancers, students, administrators, etc.

2) Require all member institutions to submit a written plan of participation by the end of August.

3) Allow for teams that don't wish to participate. Have contingency plans for any needed format changes.

4) Develop meaningful systems for evaluating and selecting officials who will be working the tournament.

5) Allow member institutions to develop local sponsorships for their participation plans and allow those sponsors to have some advertising space at the tournament.

BSC Administrators; Develop a plan and publish it for all to see. I will assume that there is no plan if I see no plan.

 

[SWWeatherCat]

BSC Administrators,

1) Choke on the new crap-ass tournament that no one will attend or have the opportunity to see.

2) Choke on the embarrassment when a 6-12 seed gets hot and lucky at the (wrong) time and is the ONLY BSC representative in the NCAA tournament.

3) Choke on reduced fan and monetary support as there is no reward for "your" team being the best in conference play.

4) Choke on a buffet in "the biggest little city in world" that is on no one's preferred destination list.

5) Choke on your pay checks, you SOBs!

 

[oldrunner]

WOW!

How do you really feel? :lol: :lol:

 

[sacstateman]

Hate to point this out SWWeatherCat but Ogden isn't on anyone's preferred destination list either....neither is Billings....so either pack up or watch Big Sky TV.....like to meet you there but if not I guess maybe we can meet somewhere else not named Ogden....

 

[oldrunner]

My point in creating this thread was that it will take a lot more work and effort by the BSC administrators and member administrators to make this new BSCT a success.

In the past, the BSC administrators just showed up, threw their weight around like WANKS, did next to no work and went home with their money. They expected the host member to do all or most of the actual work. Now it is all on their shoulders. Sure, they can make this a success, but it's going to take 10X the amount of work they have put in up to this point. They make it sound like they worked so hard on making the site selection. What a bunch of prima donnas. Those guys live so far from reality, they have no idea what hard work is.

Personally, I hope they pull if off and make it a success. However, I don't see it happening. Not in the world they live in. Maybe they are counting on some pros in Reno to do all the work. Like I said before, it won't happen if they expect someone to do all of the work for them. I've watched the BSC operate over the past 50+ years. They aren't playing with a full deck, but they think they are playing with a 6 deck shoe. :yikes:

 

[SDHornet]

Agree with oldrunner. It's on the BSC admin now. For once in forever they will actually have to put in work for the BSCT.

Youtube vid of the announcement:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gt0RtnTMEKI

Interesting points:
-BSCT will run Monday - Saturday. No idea if the BSCT will alternate women-men during the week (this is my guess) or if they go women first, then men.
-Both parties seem to indicate that this will be a long term arrangement. I'm not too surprised at that.
-Loghry (sp?): "This allows every team in the conference to take ownership of the tournament."
-Based on Loghry and Foolertons responses they always wanted all 12 to get into the tournament.
-Podunk towns in BSC can't logistically support a 24 member tournament. Shocker. :lol:
-Foolerton gives Reno a blowjob.
-Reno is 100% neutral and no other locations have a core of hotels immediately surrounding the tournament location.

 

[AlumniWSU]

Likely it requires a bit more effort by the BSC office now that it's off any campus, but don't expect anything spectacular or thousands of fans flocking to Reno, not from the Big Sky. It will be the loyal fans who travel well for their teams plus some family, friends of the teams. If that is a success to Reno sponsors to get hundreds of people in town to eat, sleep & play some at the casino/hotels, it'll probably satisfy the conference too. Logistically & financially Reno was the best choice to host 24 teams in a week's time frame. Member cities & towns would have difficulty with that obviously, as far as convenience. If the BSC is intent on having all schools participate together at a neutral site with some satisfaction for ADs, Coaches, Teams & Fans, then Reno (or Las Vegas even better so if a site becomes available) are the only sensible places. It seems to work for some other western conferences, like the MWC, WCC, WAC, & Pac 12 (this year at the MGM). :twocents:

 

[SWWeatherCat]

Hate to point this out SWWeatherCat but Ogden isn't on anyone's preferred destination list either....neither is Billings....so either pack up or watch Big Sky TV.....like to meet you there but if not I guess maybe we can meet somewhere else not named Ogden....

My post was addressed to "BSC Administrators," not sacstateman. I never claimed anything about Ogden, I've never wanted the tournament in Ogden, unless Weber earned the right to host. This change is nothing more than a pile of :shit: . We won't meet in Reno or any other city (or state) that has NO BSC presence. The thought of economic support for Reno instead of any BSC town really pisses me off! Enjoy the tournament. I hope you root for the teams that have no business being there in the first place.

 

[Webergrad02]

Likely it requires a bit more effort by the BSC office now that it's off any campus, but don't expect anything spectacular or thousands of fans flocking to Reno, not from the Big Sky. It will be the loyal fans who travel well for their teams plus some family, friends of the teams. If that is a success to Reno sponsors to get hundreds of people in town to eat, sleep & play some at the casino/hotels, it'll probably satisfy the conference too. Logistically & financially Reno was the best choice to host 24 teams in a week's time frame. Member cities & towns would have difficulty with that obviously, as far as convenience. If the BSC is intent on having all schools participate together at a neutral site with some satisfaction for ADs, Coaches, Teams & Fans, then Reno (or Las Vegas even better so if a site becomes available) are the only sensible places. It seems to work for some other western conferences, like the MWC, WCC, WAC, & Pac 12 (this year at the MGM). :twocents:

In no way is the WAC tournament a success in Vegas. They didn't even publish attendance numbers in 2015. From pictures and video the championship game was about the same or worse than in years past. 1,200 fans is about the average.
http://www.sportswatch.com/wac-tournament-returns-to-vegas-despite-dwindling-attendance-numbers/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

The only fan base that is even reasonably close to Reno is Sac St. Unfortunately that fan base has had a hard time filling up their 1,200 seat gym while having the best season in history.

Lets say that the standings play out like Jon Reed predicts:
1. Weber 7 hour 40 minute drive, very strong fan base, close to airport with direct flights.
Estimated fans 300 (40% flying 60% driving)
2. Montana 13 hour 7 minute drive, very strong fan base,
Estimated fans 175 (60 % flying 40 % driving)
3. Eastern Washington 12 hours 11 minute drive, moderate fan base
Estimated fans 125 (70% flying 30% driving)
4. NAU 10 hour 26 minute drive, moderate fan base
Estimated fans 100 (Not sure on how they get there)
5. SUU 8 hours 27 minute drive, Weak fan base
Estimated fans 50
6. Northern Colorado 14 hour 33 minute drive, moderate fan base
Estimated fans 25 (95% Flying)
7. Portland State 8 hour 59 minute drive
Estimated fans 25
8. North Dakota 23 hour 44 minute drive
Estimated fans 20 (100% flying)
9. Sac State 2 hour 6 minute drive
Estimated fans 75 (80% driving 20% flying)
10. Idaho 11 hour 31 minute drive
Estimated fans 15
11. Montana State 12 hour 30 minute drive
Estimated fans 15
12. Idaho State 8 hours 12 minutes
Estimated fans 15

Total fans traveling to Reno for tournament: 940
Bored people in Reno looking for something to do: 50

Estimated attendance for the Mens portion of the tournament 990.

I think the students of these schools are the ones who get left out in this scenario. Reno is too far to drive for many students and flying is too expensive. I would like to see the Big Sky help subsidize student buses from the schools where it is reasonable.

The WAC's 20% of capacity attendance is going to look like a lot compared to our 15-18 %. I hope the presidents and AD's are happy. Has anyone got the skinny on how Chuck voted?

 

[SDHornet]

The only fan base that is even reasonably close to Reno is Sac St. Unfortunately that fan base has had a hard time filling up their 1,200 seat gym while having the best season in history.

Huh? :? We sold out every home game after the EWU game (and almost sold that one out as well).

And :lol: at your random ass attendance predictions. WTF. :lol:

Nobody is flying from Sac to Reno. WTF. :lol: :lol: :lol:

BTW I think I read somewhere that the vote was unanimous to move it to Reno.

 

[Webergrad02]

The only fan base that is even reasonably close to Reno is Sac St. Unfortunately that fan base has had a hard time filling up their 1,200 seat gym while having the best season in history.

Huh? :? We sold out every home game after the EWU game (and almost sold that one out as well).

And :lol: at your random ass attendance predictions. WTF. :lol:

Nobody is flying from Sac to Reno. WTF. :lol: :lol: :lol:

BTW I think I read somewhere that the vote was unanimous to move it to Reno.

Congrats you sold out 6 games, one being the CIT. How many more fans do you think would have attended if you had bigger gym? maybe 1500?

The closest fan base to Reno is arguably the smallest. How will attendance be next year?

I have a few family members that fly from Sac to RNO that time of year for fear of going over the pass. Your right it will be lower than 20%. Is it bad to admit that I have made that flight a few times?

Sure my predictions were wild guesses. But, I have been to enough Big Sky tournaments over the years to know that there wont be a huge amount of fans traveling to this thing.

 

[SDHornet]

Amtrak is also an option, probably cheaper and safer than flying. The Reno train station is a few blocks from the events center. I like the prospect of not needing a car for the trip to Reno next year.

I think more Sac fans will go to the BSCT in Reno than any other BSCT in the old format. The close location helps, but also knowing where the tournament will be well in advance to make plans is the bigger factor. I know I would like to check out a BSCT, and this change allows me to do that.

 

[oldrunner]

At a minimum, I would like to see the BSC require all schools in the semifinals and finals to pay for two full buses of students. and to make available more buses to students at a very low rate. They should also require member schools to schedule their spring breaks around this thing. No classes should be missed and faculty should be encouraged to attend. :rockon:

 

[AlumniWSU]

Definition of "success" depends on who you ask...just maybe the 1200 or so people at the WAC tourney spending $$ at the Orleans casino/hotel = sufficient success to them & the conference. If it's no way a success, one would think the hosts or even the conference would look to end it at the contract expiration. Has anyone heard any tale of this happening? Is there any crying, complaining going on? It's been a few years now.

It's not all just about how many fans show up from each team, the almighty $$ net income flow has other factors playing too. Sad in some ways, but post season tourneys have their own identities & different purposes than OOC & regular conference season.

Agree that the losers here are the students & would hope that some real effort is made to subsidizing & sponsoring enticements to students. Definitely some important fallout happens with this arrangement. Hard to imagine that there was simply one round of voting by the Presidents on this, that they unanimously agreed right off on it, joined hands & sang kumbaya(?)! Why wouldn't Pres. Wight support Weber's bid, UM's Pres. support Missoula's (women tourney), etc? Likely ended up with compromising & the neutral/dual site proponents won out. It's a trial run for 3 yrs! Then if the 1,000 or so average fans in attendance, plus the other factors don't work out & meet "success" criteria, it'll revert back, (or maybe the Orleans in LV will drop the WAC tourney & tempt the Big Sky into a lucrative deal). :lol:

 

[SWeberCat02]

For those wondering how Weber Pres voted, the MSU AD claims the voting was unanimous for both Presidents and ADs.

 

[AlumniWSU]

For those wondering how Weber Pres voted, the MSU AD claims the voting was unanimous for both Presidents and ADs.

Would add, ended up (but just my reasoning). Whatever, it's the deal for the next 3 yrs & for the next 3 regular season champs, a lost opportunity to their home fans, students & community to host.

 

[Webergrad02]

Its the schools in the WAC that have tried to get out of the deal with the Orleans. Both sides have admitted that it isn't working. Once USU left the WAC it was really in trouble. By contrast, the WCC uses the same venue a few days earlier and sells out nearly every session. The big difference is that you have 2-3 strong fan bases in the WCC and it is a reasonable drive for BYU, LMU and San Diego.

I am not a huge fan of Billings but at least you would have been in driving proximity to 4 or 5 of the schools. Hard for me to believe that this was a slam dunk unanimous vote. This little all inclusive party to Reno must not be costing the schools much. When few fans show and the sponsorship loot drys up, we will see a change.

The "Fool" says it is his job to get the fans to Reno. He couldn't even get decent officials to the Mens and Womens tournaments in Missoula. I just can't believe that this will be a success. I need to see a clear plan of how to get the fans and students there. It's not going to be easy.

 

[oldrunner]

OK. We all know the facts. What is our plan to dominate this thing over the next three years.

I think that we have the players to do it. I think we have the coaches to do it. Our fan base has the potential to do it.

I would donate money toward student buses and expenses. I would hope that some local businesses would step to the plate as well. The more students and fans we can get there the better chances our team will have.

I want to be part of the solution. I know there a many others that feel the same way. One of the ways to grow our program is to travel well. Let's do it. :thumb: :thumb:

 

[SWeberCat02]

Its the schools in the WAC that have tried to get out of the deal with the Orleans. Both sides have admitted that it isn't working. Once USU left the WAC it was really in trouble. By contrast, the WCC uses the same venue a few days earlier and sells out nearly every session. The big difference is that you have 2-3 strong fan bases in the WCC and it is a reasonable drive for BYU, LMU and San Diego.

I am not a huge fan of Billings but at least you would have been in driving proximity to 4 or 5 of the schools. Hard for me to believe that this was a slam dunk unanimous vote. This little all inclusive party to Reno must not be costing the schools much. When few fans show and the sponsorship loot drys up, we will see a change.

The "Fool" says it is his job to get the fans to Reno. He couldn't even get decent officials to the Mens and Womens tournaments in Missoula. I just can't believe that this will be a success. I need to see a clear plan of how to get the fans and students there. It's not going to be easy.

This has much less to do with fans and students than it does with money and logistics. To the conference and school officials, the fans are a distant second. In fact, I don't think they really care if few fans show up. In their minds, the number of fans showing up isn't going to be a big factor in how successful the tournament is. After this year's mess with Sac St scrambling to even be able to host and the headaches of having both tournaments in Missoula, the decision was made. For most fans, it sucks. But in their minds, the old way is no longer a viable option.

 

[oldrunner]

I agree that the fans were the last thing on their minds. However, there is only one way this thing will be successful, in their minds. It has to make money. Sponsorships and TV can carry the load if they work hard enough on it. The only other way to bring in money is the fan base. Any way you cut it, it will be all about marketing.

If that news conf. was an indication of the level of marketing we can expect, this thing is doomed. A Jr High student could have put out a better product. :yikes: