Sagarin ratings: Mens Basketball -Big Sky Conf. 29th

[Kabooom]

29th best conference out 33. Wont be too long before the Big Sky Champ is vying for a play-in game...Wanted to get some opinions from you folks on whether or not it would be worth it for certain BSC members who may have the leverage to negotiate a switch from the Big Sky to the WAC or Big West Conf. for B-ball. Used to be that the Big Sky Conf. was rated in the upper teens to low 20's , but that's getting to be too many years gone by now...The bottom 75% of the BSC teams really bring the rating down. Could you upgrade your basketball and olympic sports to another conference and keep playing just football in the Big Sky like Poly/Sac/Davis do? Or just only play basketball in the Big West/WAC. Oh the Days of Willie sojourner have long past,but this is ridiculous....If Weber or Montana want to ever up their roundball game, it's not not going to be in the Big Sky.

BTW ...Weebs are still the measuring stick, regardless of recent popularity or opinion...

 

[n.ogdencat]

Ugh...conference RPI is bad. I was hoping that last season was a sign of success to come and a turn back in the right direction. Instead it is proving to be an aberration. There was a lot of senior leadership across the Sky last season and a number of teams are currently in rebuild mode, but I didn't expect things to get to this point again. With the OOC done, conference RPI isn't going to climb much. Really will hurt seeding. However, if Montana wins the Sky, I think the Griz could end up with a 13 or 14 seed, at worst a 15. If Weber were to win the Sky and claim the autobid, I think the Cats could get a 16, maybe a 14, most likely a 15 (more so because of tradition than anything else). Everyone else in the Sky is a automatic playin.

I've heard some rumblings about the WAC. I think the Big Sky Presidents really made a bad move by not hiring Ron Logry as the Commissioner and instead of staying on as the deputy, he is the Associate Commissioner of the WAC. That conference is in survival mode and interested in doing thing outside the box to stay relevant. Will be interesting to see what happens in the short term. The WAC wants football, but I just don't see that happening anytime soon. I feel 5 years at the earliest, but weird things happen all the time. The new commish just came on. Hoping he mixes things up a bit. He could shock us and really make some moves to help the Sky.

 

[UtahPirate]

RPI/BPI ranking puts us at #25. I don't know what the difference between Sagarin is, but 25 or 29 I get your point. Here are a few things I think factor in.

The PAC is a turd and drags down the whole West. As the region's "elite" conference, unfortunately its incompetence reflects on everyone else. Ask pundits and they'll instantly tell you that except for a couple of teams, the whole West is awful. That is usually based solely on the fact that the PAC is so bad and they don't know much else. Eastern bias when it comes to basketball is always alive and well -- and I think that's reflected in the way these ratings are put together. How do you really rate the conferences from #18 on? Seems like a real crap shoot to me.

Other conferences have a marquee team that wins games. Gonzaga and Nevada lead their conferences and have national reputations. The WAC has two teams that are winning both at home and on the road -- UVU and New Mexico State (and Seattle has played well too). The Horizon league (#18), which I don't think would be any better than the Sky, has Northern Kentucky at 12-3 with some decent wins, the rest of the conference is pretty bad. Leaders pull the whole conference up. Based on preseason results, the Sky is leaderless.

Except for 3 teams, the Sky really isn't very good this year. Lots of leagues look the same, but they have that marquee team that at least grabs some attention. Did the Sky have one surprise win in the preseason (besides us beating the Y and then looking so bad after that)?

Much of the angst about Weber's yearly mundane preseason results gets reflected in conference rankings. We used to seem to build a little momentum from one season to the next, which I think is key to getting recognition (and higher than #16 seed) when trying to lead a small mid-major. Carry-over is huge and we seem to start from scratch every year.

As far as moving conferences ... is the Big West really (#22 BPI) that much better? The WAC (#16) has several good basketball teams this year, but what is the future of that conference? As Tal pointed out, who knows. I think all the conferences from 18 on are pretty fluid from year-to-year. Hopefully with some rebuilding teams, and new conference leadership, better days are ahead for the league.

In the meantime, I'm glad we're back home tonight!

 

[mt jack]

WSU and UM seem to be the gold standard for the league this season.

I drove up to Flagstaff for the NAU-UM game last weekend and NAU had no answer for the Griz big, Akoh. If he stays healthy, he's a game changer in league play.

Regarding the strength of the league...some good wins but not enough to change perception. ISU has victories over an improving Santa Clara and beat Boise State on the road. Montana State beat Washington State on the road. EWU has struggled but have played decent teams with a road heavy schedule as has NAU. Weber with a solid win over BYU. Idaho looks to be down a bit. Sac State's schedule doesn't look that impressive. Nor does Southern Utah's. PSU always seems to have talent but finish middle of the BIg Sky pack. I think UNC may work themselves into the mix by the end of the season and are my dark horse to make some noise.

If all things work out, I'm driving up to Flagstaff for the Weber State-NAU game in early February.