• 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!

Should all 12 compete in the BSCT?

My :twocents:

Yes, all 12 teams should be invited to the tournament as long as the conference continues to play an 18 game regular season instead of 22.

I've already heard a couple of Montana fans say it's not fair that they don't get to play Weber in Missoula this year, and they have stated that it's not a "true" regular season championship if Weber goes on and wins.

How do you compare apples to apples and oranges to oranges when every team doesn't share the same schedule? The problem I have isn't so much with the top, but rather where you start to eliminate teams. There could be a scenario where a 6th place team only played Weber State and Montana once each during the regular season, but the 7th place team played them twice. All things being equal, it's not.

You could go to a 22 game conference season, but that really limits the non-conference schedule for a lot of teams. Right now, the more games played - and won - in non-conference means a better chance at a stronger RPI.

I don't know that the tournament in Reno is the best option, but I certainly don't want it to fail. The conference needs to improve, and thinking outside of the box might be what's needed. Last year, when it was possible that Sacramento State could host the tournament, I saw lots of posters on various sites (namely egriz) insist that the conference NOT let them host and instead let the 2nd place team (i.e. Weber or Montana) host. Some true colors came out with that, and it showed me it's not just about letting the regular season champs host. Some fans in Missoula, for example, feel entitled and believe the tournament should always be hosted there.
 
The Unknown Fan said:
My :twocents:

Yes, all 12 teams should be invited to the tournament as long as the conference continues to play an 18 game regular season instead of 22.

I've already heard a couple of Montana fans say it's not fair that they don't get to play Weber in Missoula this year, and they have stated that it's not a "true" regular season championship if Weber goes on and wins.

How do you compare apples to apples and oranges to oranges when every team doesn't share the same schedule? The problem I have isn't so much with the top, but rather where you start to eliminate teams. There could be a scenario where a 6th place team only played Weber State and Montana once each during the regular season, but the 7th place team played them twice. All things being equal, it's not.

You could go to a 22 game conference season, but that really limits the non-conference schedule for a lot of teams. Right now, the more games played - and won - in non-conference means a better chance at a stronger RPI.

I don't know that the tournament in Reno is the best option, but I certainly don't want it to fail. The conference needs to improve, and thinking outside of the box might be what's needed. Last year, when it was possible that Sacramento State could host the tournament, I saw lots of posters on various sites (namely egriz) insist that the conference NOT let them host and instead let the 2nd place team (i.e. Weber or Montana) host. Some true colors came out with that, and it showed me it's not just about letting the regular season champs host. Some fans in Missoula, for example, feel entitled and believe the tournament should always be hosted there.
Click to expand...
I'd be OK if it was always in Ogden, what's your point. I'm sure EWU wants it to be in Cheney every year, and the same for every BSC team. The tournament should be at BSC venues capable of holding a minimum number of fans (what that number is?) And if a team such as Suck St can't meet the minimum it should be offered to the next seed.
 
Sac wasn't planning to host it in the nest when they were prepping. It's a big sky rule that it has to have like 3k seats. When psi hosted they used an nba arena.
 
The Unknown Fan said:
My :twocents:

Yes, all 12 teams should be invited to the tournament as long as the conference continues to play an 18 game regular season instead of 22.

I've already heard a couple of Montana fans say it's not fair that they don't get to play Weber in Missoula this year, and they have stated that it's not a "true" regular season championship if Weber goes on and wins.

How do you compare apples to apples and oranges to oranges when every team doesn't share the same schedule? ...
Click to expand...

That's the only point to all 12 in that I can see merit to, however, taking the BSC tournament out of BSC venues still blows.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Back
Top