Weak Schedule

tetoncat · Post by **tetoncat** » Tue Nov 15, 2005 9:47 am

So the football team should schedule easier, not lose to OSU, gain a couple more low level 1AA wins so they can make the playoffs but the basketball team should schedule major teams, get their butts whipped and lose in the tourney so we can go home. Your arguments need to be consistent fans.

whitetrashgriz · Post by **whitetrashgriz** » Tue Nov 15, 2005 10:15 am

tetoncat wrote:So the football team should schedule easier, not lose to OSU, gain a couple more low level 1AA wins so they can make the playoffs but the basketball team should schedule major teams, get their butts whipped and lose in the tourney so we can go home. Your arguments need to be consistent fans.

in a way...yes. the football season is so short, there is way less room for error. as we are seeing this year, our first 3 weeks is coming back to bite us in the a$$. dont get me wrong, we should have taken care of business, but you take away our cal-poly and especially ok state and i think that we are in the playoffs. in basketball some teams play 30 games a year. we could lose more than five of those, and if there to teams like washington, nebraska, colorado, and florida, it helps us in the end. very rarely does a bsc team get an auto-bid in the field of 65. so we are trying to post the best record possible, and win our tourney for a higher seed. while i dont totally agree with coach browns reasoning, mainly because as cat fans especially know, anything can happen in the tourney. lets not worry about what seed we'll be in the tourney. lets just make sure that they get there first!. but it is different than football.

El_Gato · Post by **El_Gato** » Tue Nov 15, 2005 10:53 am

The only Big Sky team in the NCAA tournament every year will be the BSC tournament winner. I don't think a Big Sky team has ever received an at-large bid to the Dance; mslacat, confirm/correct please?

Given that, I disagree with the idea that LOSING to good/great/high-profile DI teams makes you any more prepared to win 2 or 3 games in the Big Sky tourney; once you've played the other Big Sky teams for a couple of months, you should be pretty well prepared for any team you meet in the BSC Tourney.

Regarding March Madness, IMO the bottom line is if you win the BSC Tournament, you're in; if you don't, you're out, REGARDLESS OF YOUR RECORD OR YOUR RPI.

HOWEVER, if you do lose the BSC Tournament but have 23+ wins, I think you're a lock for the NIT, regardless of your RPI.

CatFamily · Post by **CatFamily** » Tue Nov 15, 2005 12:11 pm

Why is it the media and some fans puts so much emphasis on "winning the conference tourney" when what it amounts to is sending a sacrificial lamb to the NCAA's. I's sorry, but I don't put a lot of stock in the BSC tourney other than it gives the Cats players a 1-3 more games to play. I just think it is a bigger and more impressive accomplishment to finish No. 1 or in the top 2-3 of the BSC conference. Success over the course of the year in the BSC is far better than winning the tourney after the fact and increases the fans enthusisasm and attendance during the year. I again think it would be more beneficial to have a 1AA basketball league where BSC teams could compete for a national championship.

WolfPtCat · Post by **WolfPtCat** » Tue Nov 15, 2005 1:48 pm

CatFamily wrote:Why is it the media and some fans puts so much emphasis on "winning the conference tourney" when what it amounts to is sending a sacrificial lamb to the NCAA's. I's sorry, but I don't put a lot of stock in the BSC tourney other than it gives the Cats players a 1-3 more games to play. I just think it is a bigger and more impressive accomplishment to finish No. 1 or in the top 2-3 of the BSC conference. Success over the course of the year in the BSC is far better than winning the tourney after the fact and increases the fans enthusisasm and attendance during the year. I again think it would be more beneficial to have a 1AA basketball league where BSC teams could compete for a national championship.

C'mon Family, are you kidding me. The main reason high school kids are willing to sit the bench for a few years at MSU (Div. 1) instead of dominating at Rocky (NAIA) is because they have a chance to go to the Dance. Winning the conference tournament is the only way to get to the field of 64. In small conferences like the Big Sky the entire regular season is played as a lead-in to the tournament: making the tournament, hosting the tournament, seeding for the tournament. It is the big prize, the only prize.

NavyBlue · Post by **NavyBlue** » Tue Nov 15, 2005 2:28 pm

I would like to see another basketball game between Utah State and the Cats (or the Griz). Any chance it could happen?

theblackgecko · Post by **theblackgecko** » Tue Nov 15, 2005 2:30 pm

I'd love to see Montana State get an NIT bid (after bowing out in the BSC tourney to the Griz, of course). Montana State could pack the Brick and get the fans excited.

The most pathetic display in sports last year was the NIT games at St. Mary's School for the Blind. Digger Phelps be ignored, the Fighting Irish owe basketball an apology for playing a miserable game in front of 3,000 fans. Montana State would have drawn a bigger crowd and played a better game.

It'll be interesting to see what happenes with the NIT, now that the NCAA bought it out. I'd love to see the NIT turn into a tournament featuring schools from conferences that get two or fewer bids to the NCAA tourney. There's a lot of fan base for some of the low profile basketball conferences.

El_Gato · Post by **El_Gato** » Tue Nov 15, 2005 3:45 pm

Forgive my lack of ability to remember the specific years, but the season after Starner took the Cats to the NCAA, they qualified for the NIT and HOSTED U of Washington, a talented team featuring Christian Welp.

The Bobcats put on one hell of a show in that game and gave the Huskies all they could handle in front of a packed Brick. If I remember correctly, Welp hit a baseline, turn-around jumper in the final seconds to break a tie & give UW the win.

It was a great atmosphere and that is a BIG area where the NCAA can have success with the NIT. By letting the higher-ranked teams HOST the early-round games (and hopefully televising them), it gives great exposure to teams and venues that wouldn't normally receive any national attention. IF the NCAA truly starts to market the NIT, I can see a LOT of reasons for a team like the Cats to "pad" their record in the hopes of qualifying for the NIT in the event that they miss out on the Dance.

BobCatFan · Post by **BobCatFan** » Tue Nov 15, 2005 7:18 pm

I would like to know what the BSC is doing to get our conference to play better ball. I am sick and tired of having the BSC champion be ranked 14, 15 or 16th, only to face teams like Duke, NC, UCLA, Kentucky, ect. What steps should this conference take to become respectable?

grizzh8r · Post by **grizzh8r** » Tue Nov 15, 2005 8:31 pm

BobCatFan wrote:I would like to know what the BSC is doing to get our conference to play better ball. I am sick and tired of having the BSC champion be ranked 14, 15 or 16th, only to face teams like Duke, NC, UCLA, Kentucky, ect. What steps should this conference take to become respectable?

We're a mid major, and that is that. With as many D-1 teams as there are out there, the really talented kids are gobbled up by the high profile teams in the ACC, Big-10, Big-12, Big East, SEC, Pac-10, C-USA and to some extent the WCC (see Gonzaga), the A-10 (Umass, Xavier, St. Joseph's), and the MWC (Utah, UNLV, BYU). That leaves a lot less talent for the low-to-mid-major conferences like ours. I'm not saying that we don't have good talent, we do. Its just that those conferences get the cream of the crop. National exposure also helps, and the highprofile conferences get most of the attention. Thats just the way it is.

BozoneCat · Post by **BozoneCat** » Tue Nov 15, 2005 10:25 pm

BobCatFan wrote:I would like to know what the BSC is doing to get our conference to play better ball. I am sick and tired of having the BSC champion be ranked 14, 15 or 16th, only to face teams like Duke, NC, UCLA, Kentucky, ect. What steps should this conference take to become respectable?

If teams in our conference want to start gaining some respectability, every school in the conference, with the notable exception of Weber State, needs to vastly improve its facilities. Bozeman is a tough enough place to convince kids to come to when they are used to much warmer climates, and it is 10 times as difficult when you don't have facilities that blow a kid out of the water. Look at the West Coast Conference for a good template. The whole conference used Gonzaga's recent run of success to drastically improve their basketball programs, which has since gotten them a good deal of exposure and an ESPN contract. The Brick needs to go - it is old, cavernous, and drains any atmosphere that attempts to develop because it gets lost in all the open space. For the record, I do realize this isn't likely to happen any time even remotely soon.

For the present, the best thing we can do to improve our program is to actually get Mick out pressing the flesh and drumming up fan support ala Mike Kramer, so that our fans consistently pack the stands and do create something of a college atmosphere and home court advantage. That is a pretty powerful drawing point for potential recruits.

theblackgecko · Post by **theblackgecko** » Tue Nov 15, 2005 11:05 pm

BozoneCat wrote:
BobCatFan wrote:I would like to know what the BSC is doing to get our conference to play better ball. I am sick and tired of having the BSC champion be ranked 14, 15 or 16th, only to face teams like Duke, NC, UCLA, Kentucky, ect. What steps should this conference take to become respectable?
If teams in our conference want to start gaining some respectability, every school in the conference, with the notable exception of Weber State, needs to vastly improve its facilities. Bozeman is a tough enough place to convince kids to come to when they are used to much warmer climates, and it is 10 times as difficult when you don't have facilities that blow a kid out of the water. Look at the West Coast Conference for a good template. The whole conference used Gonzaga's recent run of success to drastically improve their basketball programs, which has since gotten them a good deal of exposure and an ESPN contract. The Brick needs to go - it is old, cavernous, and drains any atmosphere that attempts to develop because it gets lost in all the open space. For the record, I do realize this isn't likely to happen any time even remotely soon.

For the present, the best thing we can do to improve our program is to actually get Mick out pressing the flesh and drumming up fan support ala Mike Kramer, so that our fans consistently pack the stands and do create something of a college atmosphere and home court advantage. That is a pretty powerful drawing point for potential recruits.

The Brick is a palace compard to the facilities at Sac State or Portland State. Class C schools would be ashamed to have gyms that small.

BozoneCat · Post by **BozoneCat** » Tue Nov 15, 2005 11:11 pm

theblackgecko wrote:The Brick is a palace compard to the facilities at Sac State or Portland State. Class C schools would be ashamed to have gyms that small.

No kidding. Sadly, it adversely affects MSU and UM, because who wants to play in those sh*tholes every season - even if you're on the road? Good players love to play in great environments (see: all teams that love to play in Washington-Read every other year). MSU and UM have decent facilities, and our conference will never be able to move up until the jokers at PAM State and Portland State High School build real gyms. At least Suck State has some plans in place for an arena.

bozbobcat · Post by **bozbobcat** » Tue Nov 15, 2005 11:17 pm

The Fieldhouse is really a great place to watch a game, especially compared to the facilites at Sac, PSU, and Idaho St. One thing I think that made the Fieldhouse seem so dead is the wall color. It's too dark in there. As for atmosphere, it's a fun place when 6000-7000 Bobcat fans show up to cheer for their team. The 2002 conference season stands out to me where each conference game had that many fans. Good teams are the best for atmosphere. This year should be a great year for basketball atmosphere with 6000+ fans at each game down the stretch.

whitetrashgriz · Post by **whitetrashgriz** » Wed Nov 16, 2005 1:10 am

BozoneCat wrote:
BobCatFan wrote:I would like to know what the BSC is doing to get our conference to play better ball. I am sick and tired of having the BSC champion be ranked 14, 15 or 16th, only to face teams like Duke, NC, UCLA, Kentucky, ect. What steps should this conference take to become respectable?
If teams in our conference want to start gaining some respectability, every school in the conference, with the notable exception of Weber State, needs to vastly improve its facilities. Bozeman is a tough enough place to convince kids to come to when they are used to much warmer climates, and it is 10 times as difficult when you don't have facilities that blow a kid out of the water. Look at the West Coast Conference for a good template. The whole conference used Gonzaga's recent run of success to drastically improve their basketball programs, which has since gotten them a good deal of exposure and an ESPN contract. The Brick needs to go - it is old, cavernous, and drains any atmosphere that attempts to develop because it gets lost in all the open space. For the record, I do realize this isn't likely to happen any time even remotely soon.

For the present, the best thing we can do to improve our program is to actually get Mick out pressing the flesh and drumming up fan support ala Mike Kramer, so that our fans consistently pack the stands and do create something of a college atmosphere and home court advantage. That is a pretty powerful drawing point for potential recruits.

i have been in the zags facilities many times and let me tell you, their success has nothing to do with their facilities. there bleachers are old and wobbly, the gym is tiny, which is good for homecourt advantage, but not recruiting, the weightroom sucks, the layout of the whole building ir crazy, like a maze, and their summer camps are the worst. the fact is, we are still a mid-major, and we could have the best facilities in the country, and it wouldn't change the fact that we are a mid-major!

BozoneCat · Post by **BozoneCat** » Wed Nov 16, 2005 1:30 am

whitetrashgriz wrote:i have been in the zags facilities many times and let me tell you, their success has nothing to do with their facilities. there bleachers are old and wobbly, the gym is tiny, which is good for homecourt advantage, but not recruiting, the weightroom sucks, the layout of the whole building ir crazy, like a maze, and their summer camps are the worst. the fact is, we are still a mid-major, and we could have the best facilities in the country, and it wouldn't change the fact that we are a mid-major!

Gonzaga just opened a brand-spanking-new basketball arena last year, and I hear it is a great facility. The pics online look pretty cool. Even in their old arena, it may not have been the nicest amenity-wise, but the place was loud and raucous and gave them a huge home-court advantage.

I disagree that we, or the Big Sky in general, are a "mid-major." I consider us to be a lower-mid-major. The mid-major conferences, in my opinion, are the likes of the Ohio Valley Conference, Mountain West, and Conference USA. We certainly do not belong in that group. Upgrading our facilities (drastically) wouldn't necessarily vault us up to perennial Sweet 16 status, but it would certainly give us a much better recruiting advantage, which would serve to upgrade our overall talent year in and year out, which would lead to more successful teams that might have a shot to make a little noise in the NCAA's.

whitetrashgriz · Post by **whitetrashgriz** » Wed Nov 16, 2005 1:45 am

BozoneCat wrote:
whitetrashgriz wrote:i have been in the zags facilities many times and let me tell you, their success has nothing to do with their facilities. there bleachers are old and wobbly, the gym is tiny, which is good for homecourt advantage, but not recruiting, the weightroom sucks, the layout of the whole building ir crazy, like a maze, and their summer camps are the worst. the fact is, we are still a mid-major, and we could have the best facilities in the country, and it wouldn't change the fact that we are a mid-major!
Gonzaga just opened a brand-spanking-new basketball arena last year, and I hear it is a great facility. The pics online look pretty cool. Even in their old arena, it may not have been the nicest amenity-wise, but the place was loud and raucous and gave them a huge home-court advantage.

true story bozone. i was referring to their previous facilities that they were in while having so much success. and i also agree that we are a lower-mid-major. but that wasn't really my point so i didn't want to type that much. actually i think that if you really classify all the teams in 1-aa, we are mid-to-low-lower-semi-mid-minor conference!
I disagree that we, or the Big Sky in general, are a "mid-major." I consider us to be a lower-mid-major. The mid-major conferences, in my opinion, are the likes of the Ohio Valley Conference, Mountain West, and Conference USA. We certainly do not belong in that group. Upgrading our facilities (drastically) wouldn't necessarily vault us up to perennial Sweet 16 status, but it would certainly give us a much better recruiting advantage, which would serve to upgrade our overall talent year in and year out, which would lead to more successful teams that might have a shot to make a little noise in the NCAA's.

El_Gato · Post by **El_Gato** » Wed Nov 16, 2005 11:18 am

IMO, any future money spent by MSU on the basketball or football facilities needs to MAXIMIZE the impact the FANS have on a contest.

For example, if we truly end up "bowling in" the south endzone at Bobcat Stadium, we need to put any new seats as close to the field as player safety allows. The remainder of the seats in the bowl should be built as steep as possible, creating essentially an echo chamber that would "force" the crowd noise down onto the field.

The best lesson we can learn from WaGriz is that fans are not simply good for $$$; griz fans actually AFFECT the outcomes of games and we need to keep that in mind, whatever we end up doing in the Brick or in Bobcat Stadium.

BTW, I had the pleasure of attending a Zags game last season in their new facility & it is excellent; it's amazing what a fat budget can accomplish. We need to find some more rich Catholics around MSU!

NavyBlue · Post by **NavyBlue** » Wed Nov 16, 2005 2:43 pm

FWIW, the WAC is a better basketball league than the MWC, this year anyway. The WAC has Nevada-Reno, Hawaii and Utah State. Those three are better than anyone in the MWC.

WYCAT · Post by **WYCAT** » Wed Nov 16, 2005 3:03 pm

NavyBlue wrote:FWIW, the WAC is a better basketball league than the MWC, this year anyway. The WAC has Nevada-Reno, Hawaii and Utah State. Those three are better than anyone in the MWC.

I am not sure I agree with that one. We will have to check back later in the year and see but the MWC has some pretty good programs year in and year out.