This will be a good match up of "non-big 6" conferences. They're both at the next teir (the ten or so conferences that I usually consider "mid"-major -despite many people hating the term) and have some really good teams in most years.
(01-20-2009 01:24 AM)nert Wrote: [ -> ]This will be a good match up of "non-big 6" conferences. They're both at the next teir (the ten or so conferences that I usually consider "mid"-major -despite many people hating the term) and have some really good teams in most years.
The next 10 or so conferences are not in the same tier as each other IMO.
For example MWC is the #7 RPI conference right now, and lets compare them to #16 (assuming their are 10 conferences that are "mid-major")
Top 100 RPI teams: MWC (7 of 9) vs. American East (Zero)
NCAA at-large bids since 2000: MWC (11) vs. American East (Zero)
There is also a big difference in the stands (08 avg attendance to date)
MWC (7630; range from 2595-13,697)
American East (1869; range from 730-3184)
Nice for the MWC and MVC but another blow to the MAC trying to gain respectability in hoops. Maybe the MAC can schedule an agreement with the Southland... This agreement is nothing but a resume booster for the tourney. Face it, RPI and quality wins drive who gets in come tourney time. When will the MAC as a whole stop playing such an awful schedule? More teams need to follow Miami's lead.
(01-20-2009 09:30 PM)tcufrog86 Wrote: [ -> ] (01-20-2009 01:24 AM)nert Wrote: [ -> ]This will be a good match up of "non-big 6" conferences. They're both at the next teir (the ten or so conferences that I usually consider "mid"-major -despite many people hating the term) and have some really good teams in most years.
The next 10 or so conferences are not in the same tier as each other IMO.
For example MWC is the #7 RPI conference right now, and lets compare them to #16 (assuming their are 10 conferences that are "mid-major")
Top 100 RPI teams: MWC (7 of 9) vs. American East (Zero)
NCAA at-large bids since 2000: MWC (11) vs. American East (Zero)
There is also a big difference in the stands (08 avg attendance to date)
MWC (7630; range from 2595-13,697)
American East (1869; range from 730-3184)
Since the conferences between 7-16 change all the time, the ones there this week isn't what I meant (obviously).
My point is that people take offense to the term "mid-major", ignoring the fact that the term implies a three tiered set-up - not a two-tier set-up. Let's assume "major" refers to playing basketball in the highest bracket (Div 1).
Upper-majors:
ACC, BigEast, Big11, Big12, PAC-10 and SEC
The top 6 clearly have a different set of rules, get multiple bids by "just being who they are" etc.
low-majors:
America East ....NE, ....Patriot, .... SWAC etc
They get an auto-bid to the NCAA tournament and very rarely anything else. In fact, even a runaway champion that dominated the league would likely not get an at-large bid if they lost their own tournament.
and somewhere in-between....
The mid-majors:
A-10, ....MVC, MWC, ....WAC, West Coast
They get an auto bid and usually get another bid (to the NIT, if not the NCAAs). A run-away champion that loses their own tournament would
likely get an at-large invite. This doesn't have to be true for them
all the time (every mid-major conference will have their up years and down years), but this would be the case more often than not.
I counted them up a few years ago and came up with about 10 that "fit" the basic description. Surely the A-10 would the best the best of these conferences lately - but it used to be C-USA until the BigEast gutted them. The BigWest probably used to be one until they lost NMSU and UtahSt to the WAC. It's fluid.