Mid-majors in the Sweet 16

[Easy Mac]

Because the overwhelming sentiment is that they have been liberated, i figured someone should look at the history and see what is what.

Now, what exactly is a mid-major? I have no clue. It seems it bends and molds depending on the point someone is trying to make. Sometimes, its anyone outside the "Big 6", other times its anyone out of 1-a football. Personally, I think anyone outside the big 6 is a mid-major, but some should be considered low majors (non-scholie conferences, perenially 1-bid conferences). Since I really don't feel like delving that deep (and since I'm not 100% sure of conference affiliations before this season), we're going with non-Big 6 teams since as long back as I can reasonably feel certain the research is relatively correct.

So without further ado, a look at the past... feel free to rebuttal at random and in non-sensical remarks, such as "My mid-major is bigger than your mid-major" and "I really root for UConn, but poor mid-majors, its a conspiracy".

2006
Bradley
Gonzaga
Witchita State
George Mason
Memphis

2005
Wisconsin-Milwaukee
Louisville (CUSA)
Utah (Mountain West)

2004
UAB (CUSA)
Xavier (A-10)
Nevada (WAC)
St. Joseph's (A-10)

2003
Marquette (CUSA)
Butler

2002
Southern Illinois
Kent State

2001
Cincinatti (CUSA)
Gonzaga
Temple (A-10)

2000
Gonzaga
Tulsa (WAC)

1999
SW Missouri State
Temple (A-10)
Miami OH
Gonzaga


1998
Rhode Island (A-10)
Valpo
Utah (WAC/MWC?)

1997
St. Joseph's (A-10)
Utah (?)
Louisville (CUSA)
Chatanooga (Southern)

1996
UMASS (A-10)
Utah (?)
Louisville (CUSA)

What does all this mean? I have no idea. Maybe the MVC has replaced the A-10 as the mid-major du jour. There have never been less than 2 "mid-majors" in the sweet sixteen (by never i mean in around a decade or so). Maybe Gonzaga is the new Utah?

Any thoughts?

Thanks to Bracketville.

[digamma]

Don't you have to add Memphis for this year as well?

[Easy Mac]

Originally Posted by digamma

Don't you have to add Memphis for this year as well?

yeah, they're fans got me confused, thinking they were a major team.

[st.cronin]

CUSA? I thought they were a major.

[DeeBrownforPresident]

After Louisville and company switched over to the Big East, I don't think CUSA can be classified as major anymore.

[cartman]

If by Big 6 he means the BCS football conferences, then the conferences are:

Big 10
Pac 10
Big 12
ACC
SEC
Big East

[Young Drachma]

I think "mid-majors" should be defined as 1-AAA schools (non-football D-1 schools) or...non-football D-1A schools. (those who play 1-AA football)

[Easy Mac]

The mid-majority lists the WAC as a mid-major... so i went with that.

[GoSeahawks]

Originally Posted by Easy Mac

Bracketville.

The site designer is very good. I love the color scheme.

[Buccaneer]

Originally Posted by GoSeahawks

The site designer is very good. I love the color scheme.

and you gotta love that font in the brackets.

[Young Drachma]

Having them play each other in the Sweet 16 is sorta crazy and the fact that they could make up a lot of the Elite 8, says a lot. Especially since the last non-BCS national title came when UNLV won.

[Warhammer]

CUSA prior to this year should not be considered a mid-major. After the changes this last year, you might as well throw them in as one.

[kcchief19]

Originally Posted by Easy Mac

Now, what exactly is a mid-major? I have no clue. It seems it bends and molds depending on the point someone is trying to make. Sometimes, its anyone outside the "Big 6", other times its anyone out of 1-a football. Personally, I think anyone outside the big 6 is a mid-major, but some should be considered low majors (non-scholie conferences, perenially 1-bid conferences). Since I really don't feel like delving that deep (and since I'm not 100% sure of conference affiliations before this season), we're going with non-Big 6 teams since as long back as I can reasonably feel certain the research is relatively correct.

What constitutes a mid-major is certainly up for debate. To me, there are essentially three levels of basketball conferences: major (the big six), mid-majors and one-bid leagues.

That said, due to the vagaries of college basketball, these rules don't always apply wholly. I didn't consider Conference USA a mid-major until this year -- it was a league created for basketball and had teams with a long history of success that were power teams. I do think CUSA would be a mid-major now.

But, not all mid-major conference teams are mid-majors. Memphis isn't a mid-major. UNLV during the early '90s wasn't a mid-major. Gonzaga is darn close to shedding the label. In essence, to me a mid-major is a team in a conference which is not a power six conference but often has multiple teams in the tourney. But these mid-major teams are teams that do not compete for post-season play every year. They occassional have down seasons and talent drops.

Of course, there is something to be said for noting that there are degrees of mid-majors. The A-10, MVC, MWC and the WAC are on a slightly different tier than your Big West, CAA, etc.

For this year, I don't count Memphis as a mid-major -- too much history of success and power conference background. I don't think I'd even count George Mason as a mid-major -- I think the CAA is a one-bid conference that got lucky this year. They certainly appear to be on the way to becoming a mid-major conference, however.

To a certain degree, it's a bit like pornography -- you know it when you see it.

[kcchief19]

In a separate point, what I think is a distinction for this year versus past years is that three mid-majors who received at-large bids and were criticized for getting in at the expense of someone else have advanced, which I think may be a new mark at first glance.

It's one thing for a mid-major to make a run after getting their automatic bid; but for Bradley, Wichita State and George Mason to get at-large bids and make a run is noteworthy. To me, it shows that mid-majors can be deserving of at-large bids -- and may in fact be worthy of higher seeds than they are traditionally given.

[Young Drachma]

Originally Posted by kcchief19

In a separate point, what I think is a distinction for this year versus past years is that three mid-majors who received at-large bids and were criticized for getting in at the expense of someone else have advanced, which I think may be a new mark at first glance.

It's one thing for a mid-major to make a run after getting their automatic bid; but for Bradley, Wichita State and George Mason to get at-large bids and make a run is noteworthy. To me, it shows that mid-majors can be deserving of at-large bids -- and may in fact be worthy of higher seeds than they are traditionally given.

Well stated.

[Dr. Sak]

Originally Posted by Dark Cloud

Having them play each other in the Sweet 16 is sorta crazy and the fact that they could make up a lot of the Elite 8, says a lot. Especially since the last non-BCS national title came when UNLV won.

Didn't it come out later that they had a ton of infractions dating to that team?

[Young Drachma]

Originally Posted by bsak16

Didn't it come out later that they had a ton of infractions dating to that team?

Yup, which taints things even more.

It would infinitely more impressive - even in the absence of those violations - if there was a "so-called" mid-major in the Elite 8 simply needing 1 game, that no one expects them to win, to get into the Final Four.

[stevew]

Man, that UNLV squad was fearsome. Too bad they were all professionals.

[MrBug708]

Big East 4

ACC 2
MVC 2
Pac-10 2
SEC 2

Big 12 1
CAA 1
CUSA 1
WCC 1

Weak year for the big conferences, only getting 11/16 teams in. It probably doesn't help that there are fewer good conferences (CUSA fell off, the A-10 certainly wasn't up to par). The Big Ten really didn't hold up their end of the bargin. Either the bottom teams in the Big Ten really, really boosted their RPI or there's just no merit in using the conference RPI scores.

The MVC's showing makes me think more and more that not enough stock was put in Missouri State.

[lynchjm24]

Majors:
6 BCS Conferences
Mountain West (Made for TV)
CUSA (Made for TV)

Borderline:
Atlantic 14

Mid-Major:
Everyone Else

[GoldenEagle]

I would say the CUSA is mid-major with the exception of Memphis, UAB. Houston, and I guess UTEP.

[Klinglerware]

For me, conferences are either mid-major or they are not (though, as CUSA demonstrates, classification can change over time). Schools like UNLV (late 80s early 90s) and Gonzaga may run big-time programs, but they were/are still in mid-major conferences.

Perhaps average attendance/arena capacity and average revenue/expenditures of member schools could be additonal metrics used in defining what is a mid-major.

[kcchief19]

Originally Posted by lynchjm24

Mountain West (Made for TV)
CUSA (Made for TV)

I think you need to take a look at the conference realignment from the last few seasons -- unless you think East Carolina at Central Florida or Wyoming at San Diego State are marquee TV games. Conference USA has been gutted of its marquee teams outside Memphis. The rest of CUSA is a mid-major haven.

[scottsportshawaii]

I agree the WAC is definitely a mid-major conference! We barely get two teams in every year.

Previous Sports Angel: Sanna

hxxp://www.sportshawaii.com/images/Sanna03.jpg

Mod edit - Please keep posts work safe. Consider this a warning.

[Easy Mac]

now that was just weird... not that i'm complaining.

[st.cronin]

Greatest first post ever?

[Galaxy]

Waiting for the boxing....

[Galaxy]

or banning....

Dola...

Where the hell did that come from?

[Neuqua]

heh

[Galaxy]

Is it just me, or is she pretty "shinny"?

[GoldenEagle]

How did this guy find us. Will this be the first boxing/banning that Jeeber passes out?

JEEBER! JEEBER! JEEBER!

[Klinglerware]

And sportshawaii is a legitimate sports site whose message board is read by a couple of FOFC members. The pimping of the site with the off-topic pic does seem a little weird to me...

[panerd]

Originally Posted by kcchief19

I think you need to take a look at the conference realignment from the last few seasons -- unless you think East Carolina at Central Florida or Wyoming at San Diego State are marquee TV games. Conference USA has been gutted of its marquee teams outside Memphis. The rest of CUSA is a mid-major haven.

But Conference USA raided and stole teams from other conferences when it first began so I feel no sympathy for them when the Big East does the same thing. If Missouri or Colorado were to leave the big 12 tomorrow there would be a "mid-major" team ready to sell their soul to take it's place. So lets not act like the big boys are responsible for all of the problems with college athletics today.

The elite shit on the middle who in turn shit on the bottom. I bet you whoever was ranked 2nd to last this season wouldn't want to schedule the team ranked last next season. This happens in sports at every level from the pros all the way down to high school and little league. (With maybe the exception of the current NFL) It happens at almost every job. And it ain't going away any time soon.

[JeeberD]

I consider non-BCS conferences to be mid-majors...

[lynchjm24]

Originally Posted by kcchief19

I think you need to take a look at the conference realignment from the last few seasons -- unless you think East Carolina at Central Florida or Wyoming at San Diego State are marquee TV games. Conference USA has been gutted of its marquee teams outside Memphis. The rest of CUSA is a mid-major haven.

I understand that the alignments have changed and in a few years CUSA will probably be a true mid-major. It was never that great of a conference anyway and always was overrated most years anyway.

You can't have half a conference of mid-majors and non-mid-majors. You are a mid-major because of the conference you are in... with perhaps the lone exception of Gonzaga.

[Samdari]

Originally Posted by lynchjm24

You can't have half a conference of mid-majors and non-mid-majors. You are a mid-major because of the conference you are in... with perhaps the lone exception of Gonzaga.

I actually find Memphis to be in that category as well. None of the other schools in the C-USA can possibly be considered a major basketball school. UNLV used to be the same way, unquestionably a major basketball program in unquestionably a mid-major league.

[lynchjm24]

Originally Posted by Samdari

I actually find Memphis to be in that category as well. None of the other schools in the C-USA can possibly be considered a major basketball school. UNLV used to be the same way, unquestionably a major basketball program in unquestionably a mid-major league.

I imagine at some point Memphis will move on. They would be the perfect team to join the Big East football schools when they come to their senses and break away from the basketball schools.

If they stay in CUSA long term, they would be a second exception though as CUSA will slide into midmajordom behind the Valley and maybe the Colonial and even the A-10 if they ever get their shit together.

[Klinglerware]

I posted this in another thread and I thought it was an interesting issue in light of the successes of some of the basketball mid-majors in recent years. Specifically, I wonder if the "era of the mid-major" will come to an end, now that the NBA will soon require American players to be enrolled in college for at least one year before they can enter the draft.

How will the new rule impact on the success that mid-majors have had in the past decade? The conventional wisdom seems to be that mid-majors will lose the parity they once enjoyed and will fare rather poorly once those players good enough to enter the NBA out of high school suddenly have to play in college (and presumably will prefer to play for major conference schools).

On the other hand, will there be any impact from the new APR rules? Players who leave school early will impact the APR negatively, even more so if that player was a poor student. How much would major programs take a risk on players that are likely early-entrants? If they shy away, it could open the door to mid-major programs who, judging from their relatively poor APR scores, are already more willing to take-on academic risks (although I understand that the financial resources major conference schools have for academic support also play in to APR scores). Not completely analogous, but we sort of see this phenomenon in college football where BCS schools tend to shy away from non/partial qualifiers opening the door to mid-major I-A schools for recruiting these players.

[SackAttack]

Originally Posted by Klinglerware

I posted this in another thread and I thought it was an interesting issue in light of the successes of some of the basketball mid-majors in recent years. Specifically, I wonder if the "era of the mid-major" will come to an end, now that the NBA will soon require American players to be enrolled in college for at least one year before they can enter the draft.

How will the new rule impact on the success that mid-majors have had in the past decade? The conventional wisdom seems to be that mid-majors will lose the parity they once enjoyed and will fare rather poorly once those players good enough to enter the NBA out of high school suddenly have to play in college (and presumably will prefer to play for major conference schools).

On the other hand, will there be any impact from the new APR rules? Players who leave school early will impact the APR negatively, even more so if that player was a poor student. How much would major programs take a risk on players that are likely early-entrants? If they shy away, it could open the door to mid-major programs who, judging from their relatively poor APR scores, are already more willing to take-on academic risks (although I understand that the financial resources major conference schools have for academic support also play in to APR scores). Not completely analogous, but we sort of see this phenomenon in college football where BCS schools tend to shy away from non/partial qualifiers opening the door to mid-major I-A schools for recruiting these players.

I think the impact for mid-majors will be two-fold. They won't lose players, because they tend not to recruit the major NBA prospects to begin with. On the other hand, the high school seniors who would have gone will go spend at least one year in college, and that will help the talent pool some for the major schools...but the major schools won't have an increase in continuity, because that recruit influx will still consist of one-and-dones. Marginal positive impact for the majors, marginal minor impact for the mid-majors, but I generally think that the relative stability the mid-majors get will keep them competitive.

[Easy Mac]

Also, don't forget that means one less player will get recruited by a major team due to scholarship limits that would otherwise have gone to the nba, so that should mean 1 better player will slip to the mid-majors.

[st.cronin]

Come on, there aren't THAT many players that skip college each year. There's maybe 1 or 2 guys each year who would actually impact the college game.

[Easy Mac]

There were 9 and 10 players who declared from high school the past two years. If they go to college, thats 10 better players the mid majors get each year, and 10 players they get to groom for 4 years.

[Klinglerware]

All very good points.

I do wonder how the APR will change the landscape. Major programs have better APR scores than mid-majors. This is partially due to better funding of academic support systems that keep their players eligible. Also, because of conference eligibility mandates (some conferences don't take non-qualifiers), major programs already tend not to take risks on potential academic headaches.

I would suspect that many mid-majors have emerged in the past decade because of the shift in eligibility requirements on the part of the major conferences. Due to the shift in elgibility philosophy, there are more high-quality athletes (who happen to be riskier academic propositions) for mid-major programs to roll the dice on.

With the advent of the APR, upgrading talent in this manner may no longer be worth it--as there are the additional scholarship and post-season participation penalties. This year's cinderella, George Mason, had a very poor 918 score for their Men's Basketball progeam--they were spared scholarship penalties because they were given the benefit of the doubt thanks to the magic of confidence intervals. They certainly will lose scholarships and perhaps may be barred from future tournaments altogether if they continue to perform at this level.

Schools like George Mason are in a tough position: the talent pool suggests that they have to take academic risks in order to compete with the bigger schools, but taking those risks could make these programs less competitive anyway via the risk of lost scholarships. I don't know if schools will be willing to take those risks moving forward, especially since the reward seems less certain.