MU ATO Wrote:If you like your school being called a mid-major then that fine, I personally think insults are offensive and will continue to be agitated when it is used.

I dislike the fact that we are mid-major far more than I dislike the term.

Disagreeable words are sometimes necessary to describe reality. The reality is, the MAC is usually a one-bid conference in basketball and it is a no-(BCS)-bid conference in football.

That's a mid major.

And I personally think mid-major might be better to say than "non-BCS." The former connotes an exciting overachiever. The later suggests someone who is locked out of an elite club, essentially ineligible for the supposed "national championship."

At least that's how I see it.

Willo Wrote:MAJORS
ACC
Big East
Big Ten
Big 12
Pac 10
SEC

High-Mid Majors
Atlantic 10
C-USA

Mid-Majors
WAC
MWC
MAC
Horizon
WCC

Low-Mid-Majors
America East
Ivy
MCC
MVC
Sun Belt

Barely Majors
Atlantic Sun
Big Sky
Big South
Colonial
MAAC
Northeast
Southern
Southland
SWAC

That looks about spot on to me.

I assume you are talking mid-major in football and basketball here. I don't see Conference USA beig a high mid-major based upon football alone. The Mountain West is a better football league right now mainly due to Utah. I also do not see being a mid-major anything to be upset about and it is pretty accurate base on finances and attendance.

The MAC would be a high mid-major if some of the bottom feeders would elevate their programs to the level of the top 5-6 programs. I look for Central Michigan, Ball State and Western Michigan to do this based upon past history. Not so sure about the rest.

falconflier Wrote:I don't see Conference USA beig a high mid-major based upon football alone.

No. It isn't. And it's about to slide backwards in basketball, a sport in which it arguably was a high major.

DogTracks Wrote:I think the hard part with the "mid-major" tag is that it seems to be something that comes from basketball.

And in men's basketball "mid-major" is associated with those teams from "smaller conferences" that show up and pull and upset or 2 and make a little run in the tournament. See Valpo, Kent State, Gonzaga for illustrations.

Those teams are celebrated and ESPN has built a little event around mid-majors.

I think there's some value in the term if we could just get it to be used in the same somewhat affectionate way in football. The TV basketball pundit class embrace the cinderall story phenomenon. The trouble is that the TV football pundits view a mid-major football team as an unworth interloper.

I tend to think the non-BCS conferences should band together and do a little marketing for themselves on this. Of course, there's a wrinkle with CUSA and the MWC being considered "major" for basketball purposes by and large (how CUSA's status changes coming up I'm unclear). They also tend to see themselves in a different class than us for football too. But they may have noticed that until this year they haven't been seeing anything for their "major football" status.

sometimes that is not the case in basketball. Gonzaga should not be listed as a mid major. Although they come from a mid major conference, ESPN considers them a high major team.

Willo Wrote:Mid Major is a result of basketball programs. Mid-Major conferences are conferences that get either 2-3 bids a year (MWC, WAC) or have achieved a great deal of sucess in the tournament (MAC, MCC, Horizon, WCC)

Here's the list a group I was in came up with:
MAJORS
ACC
Big East
Big Ten
Big 12
Pac 10
SEC

High-Mid Majors
Atlantic 10
C-USA

Mid-Majors
WAC
MWC
MAC
Horizon
WCC

Low-Mid-Majors
America East
Ivy
MCC
MVC
Sun Belt

Barely Majors
Atlantic Sun
Big Sky
Big South
Colonial
MAAC
Northeast
Southern
Southland
SWAC

not sure I agree with some of the placings of the schools there. The southern conference is definitely better than barely major with ETSU, College of Charleston and a few others as well as the CAA with George Mason, ODU and others. The Big South has its shinning moments as well because of the Likes of Winthrop and Radford knocking off bigger name programs.

Actually, now that I give that list a second look: The Missouri Valley is a mid-major, not lower (IMHO). They play good basketball in that conference.

Year in and year out the MVC is stronger overall than the MAC. Horrible misplacement of them. The A-10 has been high-mid a couple of times--last year was an abberation with 3 "major" teams, none of which are major this year. They, too are slightly better than the MAC, though their weaker teams are very weak.
Colonial and Southern, agreed, should be much higher.
CUSA had been stronger than the PAC-10 in many years and will be again this year.
Really, just look at the RPI or Sagarin over a few years and make the breakdowns. I may do that when I get a bit of time.

Schadenfreude Wrote:

MU ATO Wrote:If you like your school being called a mid-major then that fine, I personally think insults are offensive and will continue to be agitated when it is used.

I dislike the fact that we are mid-major far more than I dislike the term.

Disagreeable words are sometimes necessary to describe reality. The reality is, the MAC is usually a one-bid conference in basketball and it is a no-(BCS)-bid conference in football.

That's a mid major.

And I personally think mid-major might be better to say than "non-BCS." The former connotes an exciting overachiever. The later suggests someone who is locked out of an elite club, essentially ineligible for the supposed "national championship."

At least that's how I see it.

I see your point.

Schadenfreude Wrote:Actually, now that I give that list a second look: The Missouri Valley is a mid-major, not lower (IMHO). They play good basketball in that conference.

I agree with that 100%!!

GO BRADLEY BRAVES!!!!!!