poll: would you travel to the BSC predeterminedl site?

[weberwildcat]

I wonder if the neutral site change will appeal to sky fans...I think vegas would be fun. Anywhere else very unlikely I would take time off from work and travel to it. I take that back. I would drive the 5 hrs to reno if wsu is top 3.

If all 12 teams are in, should be Wednesday to Saturday.

Has anyone on here ever traveled to a bsct? Would the neutral site get you to your first one? I've only been once but I was a student so it was easy to go, in Bozeman in 2002. If idaho state could have ever hosted I would have gone for sure.

 

[catscratched]

If it can't stay the way it is, then Reno is the only site that makes any sense at all. :wall:

 

[AlumniWSU]

I wonder if the neutral site change will appeal to sky fans...I think vegas would be fun. Anywhere else very unlikely I would take time off from work and travel to it. I take that back. I would drive the 5 hrs to reno if wsu is top 3.

If all 12 teams are in, should be Wednesday to Saturday.

Has anyone on here ever traveled to a bsct? Would the neutral site get you to your first one? I've only been once but I was a student so it was easy to go, in Bozeman in 2002. If idaho state could have ever been good and hosted I would have gone for sure.

Went to the "predetermined site" BSCT @ the "Taco Bell Inn Pavilion" :lol: in Boise, it was fun but Wildcats lost in first game, we didn't attend the other nights to see Boise St. (the low seed) knock off Cravens coached Idaho. It really was a good college basketball tourney atmosphere experience though.

I would guess the northern team fans would travel to Spokane well, but the southern teams (like Weber St.) might travel some to Reno, & it offers other nightlife attractions. :twocents:

 

[bincitysioux]

First off, North Dakota would have to be the #1 seed for me to consider going, so I would never say in September that I'm going to plan on attending the tournament regardless of location.

Under that circumstance, I would probably go to Billings and/or Ogden. There is direct flights from Fargo to SLC, and Billings is only an 8 hour drive for me.

I would probably not ever travel to Spokane or Reno. Too hard and expensive to get to those places from North Dakota.

 

[sacstateman]

If it can't stay the way it is, then Reno is the only site that makes any sense at all. :wall:

You are right catscratched.....the casinos kicking in cheap or free rooms to the teams should seal the deal easily.....Billings sucks......I've traveled to BSCT before but if your team isn't playing you need something else to do......and UND hosting the women's tournament is the reason for this exercise in the first place, it was extremely difficult to get all the teams and fans to ND on short notice.....our women's team took something like 26 hrs to get there.....probably could have walked faster than that...plus the exorbitant price of tickets on short notice.....

 

[n.ogdencat]

The Big Sky is going to look even worse with a predetermined site. Nobody will go. It will be a virtually empty arena. Remember what the WAC looked like?? Totally empty arena with a handful of fans who probably got there because they flew with the team. This whole exercise is idiotic. I don't care that the conference championship is on ESPN U, at least you see full stadiums.

 

[sacstateman]

To be real I don't remember ever watching a game on TV and thinking how bad it "looked" because the stands weren't full. I don't quite understand the "look bad" reasoning behind not having a neutral court tournament. I really don't give a rat's patooie what it "looks like"

 

[SDHornet]

I selfishly voted Reno in the poll. It’s the closest to Sac but it has the most “non-basketball” activities to offer (and seriously, who isn’t going to find their way into a sportsbook on conference tournament weekend!?!). I look at a trip to see the BSCT as something I have to sell to the wife. No way is going somewhere just to watch bottom tier D1 basketball ever going to fly (and to be honest, I don’t think I would want to watch every game anyways).

I think Spokane has the logistical advantage for the bid. About half the conference (and their students/fans) can drive there and lodging and flying in shouldn’t be an issue. Spokane is probably the only place (besides Reno) on the list I would think about visiting. Spokane has also hosted the NCAAT before so I imagine that city would put on a good show (fan fest areas, rally’s, business support, etc).

I’m ok with the format not changing however that means that I will never go to a BSCT unless we host (yeah I’ll pass on buying a plane ticket to some backwater podunk place on short notice). The BSC giving us the chance to host in the Well pretty much means that is always on the table should we ever be in that position again.

I also kind of want to see a neutral site location just to see how it goes. It might be an utter failure, or it might not but we won’t know until it has been tried. Meh.

 

[SDHornet]

To be real I don't remember ever watching a game on TV and thinking how bad it "looked" because the stands weren't full. I don't quite understand the "look bad" reasoning behind not having a neutral court tournament. I really don't give a rat's patooie what it "looks like"

This. The BSC is a 1 bid league, anyone concerned about anything BSC related "looking bad" has their priorities twerked.

 

[SWWeatherCat]

Nope, I would not travel to a neutral site. Actually, depending on the situation I MIGHT go to Vegas and would obviously go to SLC or Ogden, but would not go anywhere else. Even if it were SLC or Ogden I would have the same bad taste about it. Rational or not, a neutral site will cause me to discontinue my season tickets as I believe they would be devaluing what I'm paying for. Sad times, if this happens.

 

[AlumniWSU]

The "looking bad" with a near empty arena isn't a big deal because the only people watching a Big Sky tourney on TV will be Big Sky team fans. The rest of the country's basketball fans will be watching the "big boy" tourneys going on at the same time. The big factor playing is the COST (said so in the articles)... as in total costs to the teams to participate...would say fans experience is secondary to the Presidents. So which site offers the best moola deal to the conference will win out...for the "experiment". Anyone know when the "vote" happens, are they done visiting sites?? :twocents:

 

[SWWeatherCat]

I realize the brass considering the change aren't much interested in what the paying fans want but it makes sense to me that you would consider a poll of the following:
1) Would you travel to a BSC neutral site?
2) Which BSC venues would you travel to if that team won the right to host?

For this fan:
1) No, very little chance.
2) Definitely: WSU; Most Likely: ISU, SUU; Possibly: NAU, UNCO, UM, MSU, UI, and EWU.

So, neutral site = 0 chance
BSC venue site = 3 more than likely and 6 more with possibilities.

 

[SDHornet]

Problem is every answer will vary by fan base so such a poll would be meaningless…and it’s obvious based on the early round games that fans are already opting out of hitting up the BSCT. Having to buy an overpriced plane ticket on short notice probably plays a role in that.

 

[PURPLEFORLIFE]

A poll would totally work. It should be two simple questions: A. Keep it how it is or B. A neutral location at decided upon destination. We all know that the Sky is leaning towards Reno. Some type of payout or "support" is going to happen. No other location can really do what Reno does and Reno sooo badly wants to be like Las Vegas, that it'll do anything to get a tournament in its city; even if it is the Big Sky. But let's be honest for a second. Attendance will be paltry. Look at past tournaments. Only reason people show up is because the tournament is at somebody's home court. Other games are virtually empty. Fans can say what they want, at the end of the day we all know a neutral location will be sparsely, at best, attended. Look at regular season attendance as another variable, or if you'd like indicator of potential participation. Number of available seats at each location and how many paid for seats used could show the Conference the amount of interest in the activity. Next, how many tournament passes were purchased by opposing team fans at the past tournaments. Those numbers are pretty sad. This whole idea is going to be a bust. The conference really shouldn't change a good thing.

 

[bincitysioux]

Here are some artilces on the visit to Billings. Sounds like a decision will be made on April 17.

http://www.kulr8.com/story/28627922/big-sky-conference-representatives-impressed-with-billings" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

http://billingsgazette.com/sports/college/big-sky-conference/big-sky-conference-group-impressed-with-city-s-welcome/article_f3b269b5-526a-5337-b3f9-4dee05dec1db.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

http://billingsgazette.com/sports/college/big-sky-conference/welsch-column-billings-gives-big-sky-conference-every-reason-to/article_173329a5-90c8-5376-8995-af2e6f6dfec6.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

 

[Midmajor??]

A poll would totally work. It should be two simple questions: A. Keep it how it is or B. A neutral location at decided upon destination. We all know that the Sky is leaning towards Reno. Some type of payout or "support" is going to happen. No other location can really do what Reno does and Reno sooo badly wants to be like Las Vegas, that it'll do anything to get a tournament in its city; even if it is the Big Sky. But let's be honest for a second. Attendance will be paltry. Look at past tournaments. Only reason people show up is because the tournament is at somebody's home court. Other games are virtually empty. Fans can say what they want, at the end of the day we all know a neutral location will be sparsely, at best, attended. Look at regular season attendance as another variable, or if you'd like indicator of potential participation. Number of available seats at each location and how many paid for seats used could show the Conference the amount of interest in the activity. Next, how many tournament passes were purchased by opposing team fans at the past tournaments. Those numbers are pretty sad. This whole idea is going to be a bust. The conference really shouldn't change a good thing.

It's simple to see that moving to a fun neutral site is the best thing for the tourney and this year was the perfect example why!

Logistics for the tourney was a mess. Flight cost was prohibitive due to late notice of the location, hotel space wasn't available and double that with the woman's tourney at the same locale. If you choose the right location it will allow fans and schools to lower cost significantly and make for a better experience. When the winner of the regular season isn't decided until the last game of the year, it makes arrangements almost impossible. Find a destination spot and allow the BSC to hype the heck out of the tourney.

I agree with the BSC on this one. I think they're doing the right thing! I agree the winner hosting has been a great thing for Weber, but learned this year that it's bad for everyone else! I'm concerned about attendance at a neutral site, but the BSC has an attendance problem overall that it needs to address for its fan base! Schools need to step up their game ....... Fan buses, student excursions and other MARKETING of the tourney for fans is huge! I know PAC 12 schools help get students to Las Vegas...... Actually sponsors their student sections and helps to offset student cost!

 

[WeberSki]

A poll would totally work. It should be two simple questions: A. Keep it how it is or B. A neutral location at decided upon destination. We all know that the Sky is leaning towards Reno. Some type of payout or "support" is going to happen. No other location can really do what Reno does and Reno sooo badly wants to be like Las Vegas, that it'll do anything to get a tournament in its city; even if it is the Big Sky. But let's be honest for a second. Attendance will be paltry. Look at past tournaments. Only reason people show up is because the tournament is at somebody's home court. Other games are virtually empty. Fans can say what they want, at the end of the day we all know a neutral location will be sparsely, at best, attended. Look at regular season attendance as another variable, or if you'd like indicator of potential participation. Number of available seats at each location and how many paid for seats used could show the Conference the amount of interest in the activity. Next, how many tournament passes were purchased by opposing team fans at the past tournaments. Those numbers are pretty sad. This whole idea is going to be a bust. The conference really shouldn't change a good thing.

It's simple to see that moving to a fun neutral site is the best thing for the tourney and this year was the perfect example why!

Logistics for the tourney was a mess. Flight cost was prohibitive due to late notice of the location, hotel space wasn't available and double that with the woman's tourney at the same locale. If you choose the right location it will allow fans and schools to lower cost significantly and make for a better experience. When the winner of the regular season isn't decided until the last game of the year, it makes arrangements almost impossible. Find a destination spot and allow the BSC to hype the heck out of the tourney.

I agree with the BSC on this one. I think they're doing the right thing! I agree the winner hosting has been a great thing for Weber, but learned this year that it's bad for everyone else! I'm concerned about attendance at a neutral site, but the BSC has an attendance problem overall that it needs to address for its fan base! Schools need to step up their game ....... Fan buses, student excursions and other MARKETING of the tourney for fans is huge! I know PAC 12 schools help get students to Las Vegas...... Actually sponsors their student sections and helps to offset student cost!

Very misguided

 

[Cats meow!]

A poll would totally work. It should be two simple questions: A. Keep it how it is or B. A neutral location at decided upon destination. We all know that the Sky is leaning towards Reno. Some type of payout or "support" is going to happen. No other location can really do what Reno does and Reno sooo badly wants to be like Las Vegas, that it'll do anything to get a tournament in its city; even if it is the Big Sky. But let's be honest for a second. Attendance will be paltry. Look at past tournaments. Only reason people show up is because the tournament is at somebody's home court. Other games are virtually empty. Fans can say what they want, at the end of the day we all know a neutral location will be sparsely, at best, attended. Look at regular season attendance as another variable, or if you'd like indicator of potential participation. Number of available seats at each location and how many paid for seats used could show the Conference the amount of interest in the activity. Next, how many tournament passes were purchased by opposing team fans at the past tournaments. Those numbers are pretty sad. This whole idea is going to be a bust. The conference really shouldn't change a good thing.

It's simple to see that moving to a fun neutral site is the best thing for the tourney and this year was the perfect example why!

Logistics for the tourney was a mess. Flight cost was prohibitive due to late notice of the location, hotel space wasn't available and double that with the woman's tourney at the same locale. If you choose the right location it will allow fans and schools to lower cost significantly and make for a better experience. When the winner of the regular season isn't decided until the last game of the year, it makes arrangements almost impossible. Find a destination spot and allow the BSC to hype the heck out of the tourney.

I agree with the BSC on this one. I think they're doing the right thing! I agree the winner hosting has been a great thing for Weber, but learned this year that it's bad for everyone else! I'm concerned about attendance at a neutral site, but the BSC has an attendance problem overall that it needs to address for its fan base! Schools need to step up their game ....... Fan buses, student excursions and other MARKETING of the tourney for fans is huge! I know PAC 12 schools help get students to Las Vegas...... Actually sponsors their student sections and helps to offset student cost!

Very misguided

Maybe u didn't attend the tourney this year? It was a mess and attendance wasn't great because there were no hotel rooms in the whole town! Weber stayed in a roach motel due to their ranking in selecting a hotel and had a long bus rise home due to lack of flights!
Weber fans can be a little selfish at times!

Do we even need to talk about the Sac st drama around facilities?

 

[WeberSki]

A poll would totally work. It should be two simple questions: A. Keep it how it is or B. A neutral location at decided upon destination. We all know that the Sky is leaning towards Reno. Some type of payout or "support" is going to happen. No other location can really do what Reno does and Reno sooo badly wants to be like Las Vegas, that it'll do anything to get a tournament in its city; even if it is the Big Sky. But let's be honest for a second. Attendance will be paltry. Look at past tournaments. Only reason people show up is because the tournament is at somebody's home court. Other games are virtually empty. Fans can say what they want, at the end of the day we all know a neutral location will be sparsely, at best, attended. Look at regular season attendance as another variable, or if you'd like indicator of potential participation. Number of available seats at each location and how many paid for seats used could show the Conference the amount of interest in the activity. Next, how many tournament passes were purchased by opposing team fans at the past tournaments. Those numbers are pretty sad. This whole idea is going to be a bust. The conference really shouldn't change a good thing.

It's simple to see that moving to a fun neutral site is the best thing for the tourney and this year was the perfect example why!

Logistics for the tourney was a mess. Flight cost was prohibitive due to late notice of the location, hotel space wasn't available and double that with the woman's tourney at the same locale. If you choose the right location it will allow fans and schools to lower cost significantly and make for a better experience. When the winner of the regular season isn't decided until the last game of the year, it makes arrangements almost impossible. Find a destination spot and allow the BSC to hype the heck out of the tourney.

I agree with the BSC on this one. I think they're doing the right thing! I agree the winner hosting has been a great thing for Weber, but learned this year that it's bad for everyone else! I'm concerned about attendance at a neutral site, but the BSC has an attendance problem overall that it needs to address for its fan base! Schools need to step up their game ....... Fan buses, student excursions and other MARKETING of the tourney for fans is huge! I know PAC 12 schools help get students to Las Vegas...... Actually sponsors their student sections and helps to offset student cost!

Very misguided

Maybe u didn't attend the tourney this year? It was a mess and attendance wasn't great because there were no hotel rooms in the whole town! Weber stayed in a roach motel due to their ranking in selecting a hotel and had a long bus rise home due to lack of flights!
Weber fans can be a little selfish at times!

Do we even need to talk about the Sac st drama around facilities?

You're both very misguided, That's what Weber gets for being the 8th seed in the Big Sky!
You think flights (even in advance) are going to be any better into Billings?
Just about any place besides Ogden, Sacramento, & Portland are going to be tight on rooms if they host both the Men's & Women's tourneys.

 

[Cats meow!]

Like I said...... Selfish! There's always going to be an eight seed, they still should have decent accommodations, no matter where their seeded. Weber fans are perplexing...,, they want to get to the next level and improve, as long as their not inconvenienced in any way. The tourney is not broken as long as we are the host!