(03-12-2018 07:17 PM)msm96wolf Wrote:  

(03-12-2018 05:32 AM)UCbball21 Wrote:  

(03-12-2018 12:43 AM)Stugray2 Wrote:  

(03-11-2018 11:42 PM)Kittonhead Wrote:  -Only 3 at-large bids went to the mid major conferences (Nevada, URI, St. Bonaventure) under the new system.

-Its clear that the overall conference RPI rating isn't a factor anymore. Gonzaga pulled a 4 seed out of the 13th rated conference.

-The path for the mid-major seems to be lining up enough Q1 teams in the OOC to offset lack of them in conference play.

As titled to the power schools this new selection system is at least it seems to be fairly applied in most cases IMO.

5, you forgot Wichita State and Houston

The AAC is not considered a mid-major league by the national pundits. There are 7 high-major conferences in college basketball, mostly because the PAC-12 is so bad.

Sorry, the true power conferences average typically over 50% of the conference in the NCAA. With the remaining winning non-ncaa teams going to the NIT. AAC has come nowhere this. Averaging only 3 bids in a five year period. Actually due to the weak B10 and P12, those conferences teams knocked AAC teams out of the NIT this year. AAC has potential but has yet to prove it is a power conference year in and year out.

True the AAC averages 3 bids a year, but up until this year only had 11 teams. All the other power conferences (other than Big East) had more teams, thus more spots.

By the way, which mid major conf has averaged 3 bids a year over the past 5?

And by the way, part 2, which mid major conference has had 3 teams with top 6 sees in 1 tournament. Heck, how many major conferences have 3 teams with top 6 seeds.

The AAC is not considered by anyone to be a mid major. Sorry, try again.