Conference Tournament

[BelgradeBobcat]

Weber needs OT, but beats UNCU by 3 so the Big Sky title game will be played in front of a fairly full arena.

Here's something kind of interesting. Both Idaho men and women are in the WAC title games. If both win, the Big Sky will have 2 teams in both the men's and women's big dance...sort of since Idaho will be a Big Sky school next season.

[ilovethecats]

where we disagree is you seem to think home court advantage gives a team the best chance to move on

Yes I do.

Weber was 9-1 at home. They were 5-5 on the road, against those teams they'd be seeded against. Certainly seeding helps. But it's not as important as home court.

again, no denying home court is nice. nearly every team in the country has a better record at home than on the road...

weber also got a bye in the tourney. and that is only part of the story. more times than not the top seed also has a winning record over the bottom teams in the tourney too. I'm just basing this on experience. I have yet to hear a coach or player upset with a tourney at a neutral site. I have heard players and coaches talk about getting a bad draw in regards to what team they got paired up with.

sunday will be a perfect example. selection sunday. a great day. and when analyzing the brackets we'll here a ton about favorable matchups and tough draws based on what other teams are in the region. we'll likely here very little or nothing at all about where teams are playing their games. the "where" simply isn't as important as the "who" when it comes to college hoops.

[BLACKnBLUEnGOLD]

where we disagree is you seem to think home court advantage gives a team the best chance to move on

Yes I do.

Weber was 9-1 at home. They were 5-5 on the road, against those teams they'd be seeded against. Certainly seeding helps. But it's not as important as home court.

again, no denying home court is nice. nearly every team in the country has a better record at home than on the road...

weber also got a bye in the tourney. and that is only part of the story. more times than not the top seed also has a winning record over the bottom teams in the tourney too. I'm just basing this on experience. I have yet to hear a coach or player upset with a tourney at a neutral site. I have heard players and coaches talk about getting a bad draw in regards to what team they got paired up with.

sunday will be a perfect example. selection sunday. a great day. and when analyzing the brackets we'll here a ton about favorable matchups and tough draws based on what other teams are in the region. we'll likely here very little or nothing at all about where teams are playing their games. the "where" simply isn't as important as the "who" when it comes to college hoops.

In the Big Sky this year, the "where" seems to have been every bit as important as the "who."

[wbtfg]

Just saw big sky football member, cal poly beat csun to get a tourney birth.

[grizatwork]

Just saw big sky football member, cal poly beat csun to get a tourney birth.

Wasn't that an upset? I thought I saw that Cal Poly only has 13 wins.

[CPACAT]

Just saw big sky football member, cal poly beat csun to get a tourney birth.

Wasn't that an upset? I thought I saw that Cal Poly only has 13 wins.

They had to beat the top 2 seeds to get there.

[SonomaCat]

Just saw big sky football member, cal poly beat csun to get a tourney birth.

The son of one of the guys I work with a lot is on that team -- really happy to see them make it!

[bincitysioux]

Just to play devil's advocate though using this season as a good example. Most projections have Weber being a 16 seed, either playing in the play in game or going straight to playing a #1 seed. With that being said, does it matter whether the #6 seed or the #1 seed wins the Big Sky tournament? It's not going to make a matter in seeding for the Dance.

Hopefully, the example of this season won't continue to be the norm.

Weber got a 16 seed because of their RPI (144) and the Conference RPI (25).

Last year, the Griz had an RPI of 74 and were a 14 seed. Montana St. was the #7 and had an RPI of 317. If your team would have gotten "hot" and won the tourney last year, the Bobcats would have certainly been a 16 seed and/or in a First Four game.

Having said that, I'm not so sure being in one of the play-in games is such a bad thing. Sure the end result is a 16 seed playing a #1 if you win, but from everything I've read, a win in a First Four game nets the same tourney credits monetarily as does a 12 seed beating a 5 seed in the second round. Honestly, if my favorite squad were going to be a 16 seed, I'd rather see them be a 16 seed in a First Four game, than being a straight up 16 seed against a #1 like Weber is this year.

I'm on record that I like the way the Big Sky does it. Now having experienced it both ways with the women's team hosting, and the men's team travelling, I feel even more strongly that this is the way the Big Sky should do it.

It does make the regular season very exciting, both in that the venue is up for grabs, and that not all teams make it.

Weber wasn't even a complete lock to host it this year until UNC started to falter the last 2-3 weeks.

Next year, when 8 teams make the tourney, that 1st round bye will be eliminated, and that will mitigate a bit more of the advantage that the host school has.

The vast geography even makes a pre-determined or neutral site of the league no guarantee that it would be better attended. Had 6,000 plus for the men's title game, and 2,000 for the women's. I don't think it would be close to that for either if the tourney were in Denver or Las Vegas which seem to be the two most mentioned possible neutral sites. If it were going to be a neutral site, I really think the best options would be either Boise or Salt Lake City. Boise is reasonably situated between WSU, ISU, UI, UM, MSU, and EWU. SLC would still bring the Weber crowd. But you'd still probably have the same number of UND, PSU, SAC, NAU, UNC fans as you did this weekend. So I like the idea of these schools getting the opportunity to host it once in a while.

And I do like the idea of giving the league's best team the best chance to get into the NCAA Tournament. Weber has an awful seed and matchup this year, but how bad would it be if SUU were included in the field, got hot, and won the tournament?

We've got a good discussion going on about this same topic in this thread over at SiouxSports.com. Feel free to stop by!

[BelgradeBobcat]

If your team would have gotten "hot" and won the tourney last year, the Bobcats would have certainly been a 16 seed and/or in a First Four game.

Dang, I just spewed my drink all over the computer screen when I read that. Our team is so far from the post-season tournament, let alone "getting hot" and winning it, that it really hardly matters what the format is. The format will probably change a half-a-dozen times before MSU is ever a factor again.

Good luck in the CIT. We can't even get a sniff of that.