(01-12-2019 11:07 PM)msm96wolf Wrote:  

(01-12-2019 10:21 PM)stever20 Wrote:  

(01-12-2019 10:16 PM)msm96wolf Wrote:  Call me crazy , but I think the true measure of a power basketball conference is the average number of teams that go to the tournament yearly. Since the Big East/AAC split. I took the 5 year average. Personally, I think at minimum, a power conference should send 5 teams yearly. Using the five year average. Just using data and results, to me this is the simplest breakdown.


Power Conferences (5 or more average).
ACC 6 6 7 9 9 Average = 7
Big 12 7 7 7 6 7 Average = 7
Big East 4 6 5 7 6 Average = 6
Big Ten 6 7 7 7 4 Average = 6
Pac-12 6 4 7 4 3 Average = 5
SEC 3 5 3 5 8 Average = 5

Mid Major (2-4 Bids Yearly)
A10 6 3 3 3 3 Average = 4
American 4 2 4 2 3 Average = 3
Mountain 2 3 1 1 2 Average = 2
WCC 2 2 1 2 1 Average = 2

the problem with that is two fold...
1- the A10 has that 6 bid year which was clearly an outlier.
2 the AAC has added Wichita that made the tourney in the 1st 4 years. If you're just looking at what the conferences are- you have to figure that in....

The AAC has clearly passed the A10.

I have no dogs in the A10 vs AAC who is the bigger and badder. Neither has proven themselves in the past 5 years. Disagree about having to say you need to include WSU, their MVC success has nothing to do with the AAC success. If anything, WSU did not live up to expectations last year for the AAC and looks unlikely to go to the tournament this year. No doubt the AAC is far superior to the MVC in basketball, but they should be. I think it shows more of WSU having to play in an overall better conference and now are an average fish in a medium pond.

Any conference with UCONN, Memphis, cincy, Temple and Houston is not mid-major no matter what arbitrary line you've made up in your mind. What mid-major conference has ever won a national championship? Why isn't that your made up divide? The AAC has basically had a Memphis and UCONN problem , but now that both have taken drastic steps to correct obvious coaching issues, the conference is poised to rise back up to normal.

(01-13-2019 08:50 AM)Tigersmoke4 Wrote:  Any conference with UCONN, Memphis, cincy, Temple and Houston is not mid-major no matter what arbitrary line you've made up in your mind.

The AAC has been in every way a mid-major conference on the court the past 5 years.

That could be changing right now, this season, because the AAC certainly has the potential to be a 'power' league like the Big East, but so far, that's how it is been. The AAC has just not performed up to its potential. That's why it added Wichita State, to try and shore up the flagging basketball.

Here's a critical fact to bear in mind that your list of teams reminded me of: While schools like UConn and Temple and Memphis have strong basketball pedigrees, they are not blue-bloods, which means their national interest is highly correlated with performance.

Blue bloods like North Carolina and UCLA and Kentucky *always* matter. Their national brands are permanently elite, doesn't matter if they have a Final 4 team or are slogging through a mediocre, disappointing year. That's not true of Memphis/UConn/Cincy type teams. If they are "down", their profiles drop considerably.

So their mere presence doesn't guarantee power status from a brand POV either.

(01-13-2019 08:58 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(01-13-2019 08:50 AM)Tigersmoke4 Wrote:  Any conference with UCONN, Memphis, cincy, Temple and Houston is not mid-major no matter what arbitrary line you've made up in your mind.

The AAC has been in every way a mid-major conference on the court the past 5 years.

That could be changing right now, this season, because the AAC certainly has the potential to be a 'power' league like the Big East, but so far, that's how it is been. The AAC has just not performed up to its potential. That's why it added Wichita State, to try and shore up the flagging basketball.

Here's a critical fact to bear in mind that your list of teams reminded me of: While schools like UConn and Temple and Memphis have strong basketball pedigrees, they are not blue-bloods, which means their national interest is highly correlated with performance.

Blue bloods like North Carolina and UCLA and Kentucky *always* matter. Their national brands are permanently elite, doesn't matter if they have a Final 4 team or are slogging through a mediocre, disappointing year. That's not true of Memphis/UConn/Cincy type teams. If they are "down", their profiles drop considerably.

So their mere presence doesn't guarantee power status from a brand POV either.

UConn is a blue blood, UCLA is not. Nobody cares about the ghost of John Wooden.

(01-13-2019 02:06 PM)WhoseHouse? Wrote:  

(01-13-2019 08:58 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(01-13-2019 08:50 AM)Tigersmoke4 Wrote:  Any conference with UCONN, Memphis, cincy, Temple and Houston is not mid-major no matter what arbitrary line you've made up in your mind.

The AAC has been in every way a mid-major conference on the court the past 5 years.

That could be changing right now, this season, because the AAC certainly has the potential to be a 'power' league like the Big East, but so far, that's how it is been. The AAC has just not performed up to its potential. That's why it added Wichita State, to try and shore up the flagging basketball.

Here's a critical fact to bear in mind that your list of teams reminded me of: While schools like UConn and Temple and Memphis have strong basketball pedigrees, they are not blue-bloods, which means their national interest is highly correlated with performance.

Blue bloods like North Carolina and UCLA and Kentucky *always* matter. Their national brands are permanently elite, doesn't matter if they have a Final 4 team or are slogging through a mediocre, disappointing year. That's not true of Memphis/UConn/Cincy type teams. If they are "down", their profiles drop considerably.

So their mere presence doesn't guarantee power status from a brand POV either.

UConn is a blue blood, UCLA is not. Nobody cares about the ghost of John Wooden.

You must be young. If UConn has a 3 year down cycle you never hear about them. UCLA always has interest in their potential to be back. UConn is the next tier, but not a blue blood. UCLA has won once, been in the final game 3 times and final 4 5 times since Wooden retired.

(01-13-2019 02:06 PM)WhoseHouse? Wrote:  UConn is a blue blood, UCLA is not. Nobody cares about the ghost of John Wooden.

That's silly. UCLA is a national brand name. UConn only matters if they are having a good year. UConn won the national title less than 5 years ago, but the last 2 years had almost zero national profile, because they stopped winning.

When UConn is winning, that reminds everyone about their great success the past 20 years. When they aren't, their profile drops dramatically. Just the way it is.

And that's the problem the AAC has.

(01-13-2019 08:36 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(01-07-2019 02:55 PM)NBPirate Wrote:  The AAC is no question a power basketball conference. There are just more than 5 power leagues in basketball.

The AAC *should* be a power-level conference on the court, it has the schools with the pedigrees to be so, but so far, it just hasn't been. It has not reached that potential the past 5 years.

Fair assessment.

Still the AAC does not fit the traditional meaning of mid-major. Traditionally you had major conferences, mid-majors and minor (although nobody used that term) conferences. The Ivy and SWAC and Metro Atlantic and 7-10 others really didn't fit into mid-major. The MVC, Big West (at the time), A-10, Colonial, Sun Belt, MAC and a few others did. These were conferences that might sometimes get at large bids. The Big East, MWC and CUSA 1.0 were majors and regularly got at large bids.

Of course, everybody has their own definition of what a "mid-major" is and its being used more and more loosely than it did before.

Both UCLA and UConn are blue bloods in my opinion. There are 11 schools for me: Duke, UNC, Kansas, Kentucky, UCLA, Indiana, Michigan State, Arizona, Louisville, Syracuse and UConn. If you look at most metrics they are always near the top. The next two that could break in for me are Villanova and Florida. Having said that, this is all sort of subjective as to what someone considers is the definition of blue blood.

(01-13-2019 02:45 PM)MKPitt Wrote:  Both UCLA and UConn are blue bloods in my opinion. There are 11 schools for me: Duke, UNC, Kansas, Kentucky, UCLA, Indiana, Michigan State, Arizona, Louisville, Syracuse and UConn. If you look at most metrics they are always near the top. The next two that could break in for me are Villanova and Florida. Having said that, this is all sort of subjective as to what someone considers is the definition of blue blood.

If you look at where the McDonald's All-Americans go, its Kentucky, Duke, North Carolina, Kansas and UCLA (which is clearly #5). In basketball there is much more of a gap from the top 5 than in football, although I can't really disagree with your top 11.

(01-13-2019 02:44 PM)bullet Wrote:  Of course, everybody has their own definition of what a "mid-major" is and its being used more and more loosely than it did before.

Actually, the Mid Major probably should go the way of BCS. Love to get away from Power title since that is a football term that has been grabbed for basketball. I think this is the fairest and most accurate view of Basketball today.

Tier 1 Basketball Conference (Traditional Basketball Six)
ACC
Big East
Big Ten
Big 12
SEC
PAC 12

Tier Two (Usually 2-4 bid conference)
AAC - (Has the most potential to to move into tier 1 but has yet to produce by averaging 3 bids in five years. Eventually performance has to trump potential after five years)
A10
WCC
MWC

Tier 3
1 Bid Leagues otherwise NIT for the champ if they lose their conference tournament.

(01-13-2019 05:09 PM)msm96wolf Wrote:  

(01-13-2019 02:44 PM)bullet Wrote:  Of course, everybody has their own definition of what a "mid-major" is and its being used more and more loosely than it did before.

Actually, the Mid Major probably should go the way of BCS. Love to get away from Power title since that is a football term that has been grabbed for basketball. I think this is the fairest and most accurate view of Basketball today.

Tier 1 Basketball Conference (Traditional Basketball Six)
ACC
Big East
Big Ten
Big 12
SEC
PAC 12

Tier Two (Usually 2-4 bid conference)
AAC - (Has the most potential to to move into tier 1 but has yet to produce by averaging 3 bids in five years. Eventually performance has to trump potential after five years)
A10
WCC
MWC

Tier 3
1 Bid Leagues otherwise NIT for the champ if they lose their conference tournament.

The A10 is not on the same level as the AAC is..... Sorry but that ship has sailed.... Everyone knows it except for you...

(01-13-2019 05:09 PM)msm96wolf Wrote:  

(01-13-2019 02:44 PM)bullet Wrote:  Of course, everybody has their own definition of what a "mid-major" is and its being used more and more loosely than it did before.

Actually, the Mid Major probably should go the way of BCS. Love to get away from Power title since that is a football term that has been grabbed for basketball. I think this is the fairest and most accurate view of Basketball today.

Tier 1 Basketball Conference (Traditional Basketball Six)
ACC
Big East
Big Ten
Big 12
SEC
PAC 12

Tier Two (Usually 2-4 bid conference)
AAC - (Has the most potential to to move into tier 1 but has yet to produce by averaging 3 bids in five years. Eventually performance has to trump potential after five years)
A10
WCC
MWC

Tier 3
1 Bid Leagues otherwise NIT for the champ if they lose their conference tournament.

Lots of holes here.

(01-13-2019 05:20 PM)stever20 Wrote:  

(01-13-2019 05:09 PM)msm96wolf Wrote:  

(01-13-2019 02:44 PM)bullet Wrote:  Of course, everybody has their own definition of what a "mid-major" is and its being used more and more loosely than it did before.

Actually, the Mid Major probably should go the way of BCS. Love to get away from Power title since that is a football term that has been grabbed for basketball. I think this is the fairest and most accurate view of Basketball today.

Tier 1 Basketball Conference (Traditional Basketball Six)
ACC
Big East
Big Ten
Big 12
SEC
PAC 12

Tier Two (Usually 2-4 bid conference)
AAC - (Has the most potential to to move into tier 1 but has yet to produce by averaging 3 bids in five years. Eventually performance has to trump potential after five years)
A10
WCC
MWC

Tier 3
1 Bid Leagues otherwise NIT for the champ if they lose their conference tournament.

The A10 is not on the same level as the AAC is..... Sorry but that ship has sailed.... Everyone knows it except for you...

Like C-USA, the A-10 and MVC are realignment victims. What surprises me is how bad the MWC is this year.

(01-13-2019 05:20 PM)stever20 Wrote:  

(01-13-2019 05:09 PM)msm96wolf Wrote:  

(01-13-2019 02:44 PM)bullet Wrote:  Of course, everybody has their own definition of what a "mid-major" is and its being used more and more loosely than it did before.

Actually, the Mid Major probably should go the way of BCS. Love to get away from Power title since that is a football term that has been grabbed for basketball. I think this is the fairest and most accurate view of Basketball today.

Tier 1 Basketball Conference (Traditional Basketball Six)
ACC
Big East
Big Ten
Big 12
SEC
PAC 12

Tier Two (Usually 2-4 bid conference)
AAC - (Has the most potential to to move into tier 1 but has yet to produce by averaging 3 bids in five years. Eventually performance has to trump potential after five years)
A10
WCC
MWC

Tier 3
1 Bid Leagues otherwise NIT for the champ if they lose their conference tournament.

The A10 is not on the same level as the AAC is..... Sorry but that ship has sailed.... Everyone knows it except for you...

Jesus, is now people believe Cincinnati = Fordham and Duquesne?

You people are ignorant.

(01-13-2019 05:47 PM)CliftonAve Wrote:  

(01-13-2019 05:20 PM)stever20 Wrote:  

(01-13-2019 05:09 PM)msm96wolf Wrote:  

(01-13-2019 02:44 PM)bullet Wrote:  Of course, everybody has their own definition of what a "mid-major" is and its being used more and more loosely than it did before.

Actually, the Mid Major probably should go the way of BCS. Love to get away from Power title since that is a football term that has been grabbed for basketball. I think this is the fairest and most accurate view of Basketball today.

Tier 1 Basketball Conference (Traditional Basketball Six)
ACC
Big East
Big Ten
Big 12
SEC
PAC 12

Tier Two (Usually 2-4 bid conference)
AAC - (Has the most potential to to move into tier 1 but has yet to produce by averaging 3 bids in five years. Eventually performance has to trump potential after five years)
A10
WCC
MWC

Tier 3
1 Bid Leagues otherwise NIT for the champ if they lose their conference tournament.

The A10 is not on the same level as the AAC is..... Sorry but that ship has sailed.... Everyone knows it except for you...

Jesus, is now people believe Cincinnati = Fordham and Duquesne?

You people are ignorant.

I have not compared schools to schools. Until the AAC starts putting more than three teams a year on average, they are not that much better than the two bids teams. As much as the AAC has basketball advantages, they have not proven they are a top basketball conference. Granted they have the names but they have not been to the sweet 16 since UCONN's 2014 great run. I am saying at some point you have to back the talk with results. The AAC just has not done yet in basketball, or are results to be ignored? Wait this is a message bored, emotions trump results. If this was football, I could get the AAC people being upset but basketball they should just be disappointed. They have no reason not to have multiple teams in the top 25 and a 4-5 bid average. It has not happened in five years, please tell me when potential no longer out weighs results.

(01-13-2019 06:22 PM)msm96wolf Wrote:  

(01-13-2019 05:47 PM)CliftonAve Wrote:  

(01-13-2019 05:20 PM)stever20 Wrote:  

(01-13-2019 05:09 PM)msm96wolf Wrote:  

(01-13-2019 02:44 PM)bullet Wrote:  Of course, everybody has their own definition of what a "mid-major" is and its being used more and more loosely than it did before.

Actually, the Mid Major probably should go the way of BCS. Love to get away from Power title since that is a football term that has been grabbed for basketball. I think this is the fairest and most accurate view of Basketball today.

Tier 1 Basketball Conference (Traditional Basketball Six)
ACC
Big East
Big Ten
Big 12
SEC
PAC 12

Tier Two (Usually 2-4 bid conference)
AAC - (Has the most potential to to move into tier 1 but has yet to produce by averaging 3 bids in five years. Eventually performance has to trump potential after five years)
A10
WCC
MWC

Tier 3
1 Bid Leagues otherwise NIT for the champ if they lose their conference tournament.

The A10 is not on the same level as the AAC is..... Sorry but that ship has sailed.... Everyone knows it except for you...

Jesus, is now people believe Cincinnati = Fordham and Duquesne?

You people are ignorant.

I have not compared schools to schools. Until the AAC starts putting more than three teams a year on average, they are not that much better than the two bids teams. As much as the AAC has basketball advantages, they have not proven they are a top basketball conference. Granted they have the names but they have not been to the sweet 16 since UCONN's 2014 great run. I am saying at some point you have to back the talk with results. The AAC just has not done yet in basketball, or are results to be ignored? Wait this is a message bored, emotions trump results. If this was football, I could get the AAC people being upset but basketball they should just be disappointed. They have no reason not to have multiple teams in the top 25 and a 4-5 bid average. It has not happened in five years, please tell me when potential no longer out weighs results.

Well this is the second year in a row that they've out performed one of your "traditional 6" basketball conferences, so they do have that going for them.

(01-13-2019 07:04 PM)WhoseHouse? Wrote:  

(01-13-2019 06:22 PM)msm96wolf Wrote:  

(01-13-2019 05:47 PM)CliftonAve Wrote:  

(01-13-2019 05:20 PM)stever20 Wrote:  

(01-13-2019 05:09 PM)msm96wolf Wrote:  Actually, the Mid Major probably should go the way of BCS. Love to get away from Power title since that is a football term that has been grabbed for basketball. I think this is the fairest and most accurate view of Basketball today.

Tier 1 Basketball Conference (Traditional Basketball Six)
ACC
Big East
Big Ten
Big 12
SEC
PAC 12

Tier Two (Usually 2-4 bid conference)
AAC - (Has the most potential to to move into tier 1 but has yet to produce by averaging 3 bids in five years. Eventually performance has to trump potential after five years)
A10
WCC
MWC

Tier 3
1 Bid Leagues otherwise NIT for the champ if they lose their conference tournament.

The A10 is not on the same level as the AAC is..... Sorry but that ship has sailed.... Everyone knows it except for you...

Jesus, is now people believe Cincinnati = Fordham and Duquesne?

You people are ignorant.

I have not compared schools to schools. Until the AAC starts putting more than three teams a year on average, they are not that much better than the two bids teams. As much as the AAC has basketball advantages, they have not proven they are a top basketball conference. Granted they have the names but they have not been to the sweet 16 since UCONN's 2014 great run. I am saying at some point you have to back the talk with results. The AAC just has not done yet in basketball, or are results to be ignored? Wait this is a message bored, emotions trump results. If this was football, I could get the AAC people being upset but basketball they should just be disappointed. They have no reason not to have multiple teams in the top 25 and a 4-5 bid average. It has not happened in five years, please tell me when potential no longer out weighs results.

Well this is the second year in a row that they've out performed one of your "traditional 6" basketball conferences, so they do have that going for them.

Actually, closer to the PAC dropping into the Tier 2 if they keep this level of performance. Leaving only Five Tier 1. Never said these are permanent, this way it is currently at today.

Money is the difference between the AAC and the A10, MWC, WCC. The AAC hired the A10’s most sought after coach. That’s never going to happen in the other direction. The top half of the conference spends more than the A10 and MWC and much more than the WCC sans Gonzaga and BYU. The AAC has underperformed becuase two of its biggest spenders have sucked and Temple has been mediocre. Wichita State will be a good addition long term. Marshall didn’t forget how to coach they just had massive unanticipated roster turnover. UCONN and Memphis will be back to being at-large worthy in the not too distant future. Not sure about Temple though.

The MWC replaced Utah and BYU with SJSU ($2 million budget) and USU ($3.2 million budget). There was no chance that they wouldn’t see fewer bids with that trade. The MWC would have been a 1 bid conference for the third year in a row last year if Nevada wins the MWC tournament. They’ll be a one bid conference this year if Nevada wins the conference tournament.

The bottom line is that money matters in sports and the AAC has more of it than those other conferences. And the PAC will never be in tier 2 even though that conference is pretty damn bad currently.

(01-13-2019 02:06 PM)WhoseHouse? Wrote:  

(01-13-2019 08:58 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(01-13-2019 08:50 AM)Tigersmoke4 Wrote:  Any conference with UCONN, Memphis, cincy, Temple and Houston is not mid-major no matter what arbitrary line you've made up in your mind.

The AAC has been in every way a mid-major conference on the court the past 5 years.

That could be changing right now, this season, because the AAC certainly has the potential to be a 'power' league like the Big East, but so far, that's how it is been. The AAC has just not performed up to its potential. That's why it added Wichita State, to try and shore up the flagging basketball.

Here's a critical fact to bear in mind that your list of teams reminded me of: While schools like UConn and Temple and Memphis have strong basketball pedigrees, they are not blue-bloods, which means their national interest is highly correlated with performance.

Blue bloods like North Carolina and UCLA and Kentucky *always* matter. Their national brands are permanently elite, doesn't matter if they have a Final 4 team or are slogging through a mediocre, disappointing year. That's not true of Memphis/UConn/Cincy type teams. If they are "down", their profiles drop considerably.

So their mere presence doesn't guarantee power status from a brand POV either.

UConn is a blue blood, UCLA is not. Nobody cares about the ghost of John Wooden.

Wow. Any UCLA fan will tell you that they are not happy with the performance of the basketball program, which is one of the reasons Alford was fired. I do have respect for the UConn basketball program. But even in bad times, the UCLA program is still good. In the last five seasons, from 2014 through 2018, UCLA has:

1. Made three Sweet Sixteens
2. Had 11 players drafted into the NBA, seven in the first round.
3. Beat Kentucky three straight seasons (2015-2017).

UConn won the national championship in 2014 and has had three players drafted into the NBA in the last five years, one in the first round.

UCLA clearly has better talent and as their wins over Kentucky show, they can beat anyone. The problem has been, they can lose to anyone, as their loss to Liberty shows. They get the talent that the other top programs get, they just have not been able to get the talent to consistently win. UCLA is not an easy place to coach at and it requires the right fit at head coach.

(01-13-2019 08:58 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(01-13-2019 08:50 AM)Tigersmoke4 Wrote:  Any conference with UCONN, Memphis, cincy, Temple and Houston is not mid-major no matter what arbitrary line you've made up in your mind.

The AAC has been in every way a mid-major conference on the court the past 5 years.

That could be changing right now, this season, because the AAC certainly has the potential to be a 'power' league like the Big East, but so far, that's how it is been. The AAC has just not performed up to its potential. That's why it added Wichita State, to try and shore up the flagging basketball.

Here's a critical fact to bear in mind that your list of teams reminded me of: While schools like UConn and Temple and Memphis have strong basketball pedigrees, they are not blue-bloods, which means their national interest is highly correlated with performance.

Blue bloods like North Carolina and UCLA and Kentucky *always* matter. Their national brands are permanently elite, doesn't matter if they have a Final 4 team or are slogging through a mediocre, disappointing year. That's not true of Memphis/UConn/Cincy type teams. If they are "down", their profiles drop considerably.

So their mere presence doesn't guarantee power status from a brand POV either.

Bolded, if so, none of the new Big East programs meet that blue blood criteria either. Most are small, private schools with fan interest limited to their immediate metro areas.

This whole conversation about "power" conferences in basketball is nothing more than semantics. Power entered our lexicon as a descriptor for college football classification only.

The best programs in the new Big East and American are "high major" if you will--they expend resources, have facilities and a heritage of tournament participation and championships on par with the best basketball programs from the five largest football conferences. Those BE/AAC programs bear little resemblance to any in the mid-major group.