(06-29-2020 09:58 PM)Mav Wrote:  I guess if I had to push them all together, it'd go something like this. Doing them as a ranking doesn't make much sense to me, so I'll do them as tiers.

AAC (yes they're mid-major until proven otherwise)
MWC, WCC, A10
MVC, CAA
Horizon, OVC, MAC, Ivy
MAAC, C-USA, SoCon, Sun Belt
WAC, Big West, Summit, Patriot, Southland
Big Sky, NEC, AEC, Big South
ASUN, MEAC, SWAC

This is as much about basketball prestige as performance. Granted, I might be a little biased from a geographic standpoint, I'll admit.

Big Sky would be on the same level as WAC, etc.

MAAC and Sun Belt too high.

There really is a muddled middle of about 10 conferences that switch positions year to year and are all fairly the same level of irrelevance.

(06-30-2020 11:20 AM)bullet Wrote:  Now ESPN associates major with P5 + Big East. But AAC (especially with UConn) and MWC are majors

Not to me. The numbers tell me that the P6 are categorically superior to the AAC and WM in hoops, so the latter two require different names. Quasi-major? Semi-major? Minor-Major?

(06-30-2020 01:05 PM)bill dazzle Wrote:  

(06-30-2020 09:32 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(06-30-2020 08:11 AM)bill dazzle Wrote:  

(06-30-2020 07:53 AM)CliftonAve Wrote:  1,829 wins (12th all-time)
2 National Titles
6 Final Fours
8 Elite Eights
33 NCAAT appearances (including the last 9 in a row)
30 Conference Championships
42 All-Americans
11,250 in attendance last year
10th most appearances in the AP Top 25 since they began tracking it in 1979
University with a $1.4B endowment, 46K students and over 300k living alumni

Yeah that sounds mid-major to me.

I'm glad you posted this, C-Ave.

Some of these posters are either clueless or enjoy taking shots at leagues (in this case, the AAC) they dislike or envy.

In men's basketball, the American is a "major" conference (ranked behind the P5 and Big East) based on multiple metrics that involve budgets, coaches salaries, recruiting, attendance, historical results, etc.

To classify the American (and the Mountain West and A10, for that matter) as "mid-major" in men's hoops like, say, the truly mid-major OVC ... absurd.

I've posted before: I root for Belmont, Memphis and Cincinnati. So I can fairly and unbiasedly say the Tiger and Bearcat programs — in scale and scope — are like the L.A. Lakers franchise compared to the Bruin program.

Some people just don't get it with the "mid-major" theme — or choose to ignore the realities.

I don't see how anyone can reasonably say the AAC is in the same basketball category as e.g. the B1G or ACC, so if the AAC is a "major" hoops conference, then what are the P5 and Big East? Super-Majors?

My point is, we have to have some terminology to distinguish AAC hoops from the hoops of the P6 hoops conferences. I'm open to what you think that should be.

And remember, just because a conference is mid-major doesn't mean all programs are. E.g., circa 1991, UNLV was certainly a "major" basketball program, whereas its conference, the Big West, was decidedly mid-major. We see this in all sports and in both directions, e.g., in football, Vanderbilt and Indiana do not have "major"-level football programs in terms of results on the field, but that doesn't mean the SEC and B1G aren't "major" football conferences. So showing that some AAC schools have "major"-level credentials, such as Cincy and Memphis, does not refute the point that the conference is itself overall a "mid-major" conference, or whatever term you want to use.

Truth is, the AAC in hoops is kind of a tweener, as it is in football: Not in the same class as the true Majors, but also arguably a cut above the solid mid-majors as well.

The AAC is not on the same level as the P6 leagues. Agree. However, it is not "mid-major" like the OVC. There is a "major" difference between the two leagues. The OVC is solidly mid-major on every level. Whereas, the American has elements of "high-major-ness."

Thus my ranking (and one with which seemingly a decent number of folks agree):

P6 (or "high-major") men's hoops conferences: the P5 and the Big East (I define a "power league" in men's basketball as one in which every program is a high-major or, even more so, a blueblood.)

Major conferences: AAC, A10, MWC and perhaps the WCC. These leagues have at least half their programs as "major" to "high major" but also have various "flaws" (i.e., some mid-major-esque programs, the lack of a blueblood, the inability to get more than three teams to the NCAA tourney, etc.)

Mid-Major: OVC is an example

Low-Major: the lowest of the DI leagues

GoldenWarrior11 outlines this fairly and accurately in a previous post.

That works for me.

(06-30-2020 05:50 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(06-30-2020 01:05 PM)bill dazzle Wrote:  

(06-30-2020 09:32 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(06-30-2020 08:11 AM)bill dazzle Wrote:  

(06-30-2020 07:53 AM)CliftonAve Wrote:  1,829 wins (12th all-time)
2 National Titles
6 Final Fours
8 Elite Eights
33 NCAAT appearances (including the last 9 in a row)
30 Conference Championships
42 All-Americans
11,250 in attendance last year
10th most appearances in the AP Top 25 since they began tracking it in 1979
University with a $1.4B endowment, 46K students and over 300k living alumni

Yeah that sounds mid-major to me.

I'm glad you posted this, C-Ave.

Some of these posters are either clueless or enjoy taking shots at leagues (in this case, the AAC) they dislike or envy.

In men's basketball, the American is a "major" conference (ranked behind the P5 and Big East) based on multiple metrics that involve budgets, coaches salaries, recruiting, attendance, historical results, etc.

To classify the American (and the Mountain West and A10, for that matter) as "mid-major" in men's hoops like, say, the truly mid-major OVC ... absurd.

I've posted before: I root for Belmont, Memphis and Cincinnati. So I can fairly and unbiasedly say the Tiger and Bearcat programs — in scale and scope — are like the L.A. Lakers franchise compared to the Bruin program.

Some people just don't get it with the "mid-major" theme — or choose to ignore the realities.

I don't see how anyone can reasonably say the AAC is in the same basketball category as e.g. the B1G or ACC, so if the AAC is a "major" hoops conference, then what are the P5 and Big East? Super-Majors?

My point is, we have to have some terminology to distinguish AAC hoops from the hoops of the P6 hoops conferences. I'm open to what you think that should be.

And remember, just because a conference is mid-major doesn't mean all programs are. E.g., circa 1991, UNLV was certainly a "major" basketball program, whereas its conference, the Big West, was decidedly mid-major. We see this in all sports and in both directions, e.g., in football, Vanderbilt and Indiana do not have "major"-level football programs in terms of results on the field, but that doesn't mean the SEC and B1G aren't "major" football conferences. So showing that some AAC schools have "major"-level credentials, such as Cincy and Memphis, does not refute the point that the conference is itself overall a "mid-major" conference, or whatever term you want to use.

Truth is, the AAC in hoops is kind of a tweener, as it is in football: Not in the same class as the true Majors, but also arguably a cut above the solid mid-majors as well.

The AAC is not on the same level as the P6 leagues. Agree. However, it is not "mid-major" like the OVC. There is a "major" difference between the two leagues. The OVC is solidly mid-major on every level. Whereas, the American has elements of "high-major-ness."

Thus my ranking (and one with which seemingly a decent number of folks agree):

P6 (or "high-major") men's hoops conferences: the P5 and the Big East (I define a "power league" in men's basketball as one in which every program is a high-major or, even more so, a blueblood.)

Major conferences: AAC, A10, MWC and perhaps the WCC. These leagues have at least half their programs as "major" to "high major" but also have various "flaws" (i.e., some mid-major-esque programs, the lack of a blueblood, the inability to get more than three teams to the NCAA tourney, etc.)

Mid-Major: OVC is an example

Low-Major: the lowest of the DI leagues

GoldenWarrior11 outlines this fairly and accurately in a previous post.

That works for me.

(06-30-2020 01:11 PM)dbackjon Wrote:  

(06-29-2020 09:58 PM)Mav Wrote:  I guess if I had to push them all together, it'd go something like this. Doing them as a ranking doesn't make much sense to me, so I'll do them as tiers.

AAC (yes they're mid-major until proven otherwise)
MWC, WCC, A10
MVC, CAA
Horizon, OVC, MAC, Ivy
MAAC, C-USA, SoCon, Sun Belt
WAC, Big West, Summit, Patriot, Southland
Big Sky, NEC, AEC, Big South
ASUN, MEAC, SWAC

This is as much about basketball prestige as performance. Granted, I might be a little biased from a geographic standpoint, I'll admit.

Big Sky would be on the same level as WAC, etc.

MAAC and Sun Belt too high.

There really is a muddled middle of about 10 conferences that switch positions year to year and are all fairly the same level of irrelevance.

Big Sky doesn't have any programs on the same level as NMSU, and Grand Canyon's getting better and better. I did overrate the WAC a little. I'd put them a tier down if I was to do it over. Still, they're not what they were and it looks like they're forming some sort of identity as a Southwest-centered conference.

Sure, at the bottom it's a mess, but the HBCU conferences are the anchors. For whatever reason they can't perform in basketball. ASUN's performed alright but they're a stepping stone conference. I'd probably put the NEC down there if I was to do it over again too.

when your conference features teams like Cincy, Memphis, WSU, Temple, Houston, Tulsa, etc I don't see any possible way to view it as mid-major

as someone else said Belmont, Cincy, and Memphis can't all be mid-majors...that's like saying the Washington Generals and LA Lakers are 'in the same league' so to speak

(06-30-2020 08:08 PM)UofMemphis Wrote:  when your conference features teams like Cincy, Memphis, WSU, Temple, Houston, Tulsa, etc I don't see any possible way to view it as mid-major

as someone else said Belmont, Cincy, and Memphis can't all be mid-majors...that's like saying the Washington Generals and LA Lakers are 'in the same league' so to speak

And it also depends on your time perspective. In recent years, if you say AAC is not a major, then the Pac 12 isn't either.

(06-30-2020 08:18 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(06-30-2020 08:08 PM)UofMemphis Wrote:  when your conference features teams like Cincy, Memphis, WSU, Temple, Houston, Tulsa, etc I don't see any possible way to view it as mid-major

as someone else said Belmont, Cincy, and Memphis can't all be mid-majors...that's like saying the Washington Generals and LA Lakers are 'in the same league' so to speak

And it also depends on your time perspective. In recent years, if you say AAC is not a major, then the Pac 12 isn't either.

BINGO!

Just to get this out of the way, I'm well aware my school has not made it to the Big Dance since 2000 and plays in about the 12th-15thish best conference. So I know my school's place in hoops, although I am hopeful for the coming years under Dustin Kerns...

So, as an observer, I fully recognize the capabilities of AAC programs. Pretty much all of them not named ECU and Tulane can/should make the Tournament bare minimum once every five years or so. Most of them 3 out of every 5. Rattle off their names: Cincinnati, Memphis, Houston, Wichita State, Temple, SMU (under the right coach), Tulsa, UCF (under Johnny Dawkins), and even USF on occasion. That's a great list of basketball schools.

But what could be a 5-8 bid league, if enough teams would ever be good at the same time, has been more like a 3-4 bid league for most of the league's existence.

I'm not calling it mid-major. No one is saying Cincinnati = Belmont. I'm saying that its bid count is closer to what the A-10 has had than what the P5/Big East have had. And that is what separates, thus far, the P5/Big East from the AAC.

The AAC could be right on par with any conference in the NCAA, but it has come up short in its short history. At the AAC's best, it has been comparable to a P5/Big East league that's having a down year, like the ACC this past season. This is in spite of having what are clearly high, high major individual programs.

(06-30-2020 08:08 PM)UofMemphis Wrote:  when your conference features teams like Cincy, Memphis, WSU, Temple, Houston, Tulsa, etc I don't see any possible way to view it as mid-major

as someone else said Belmont, Cincy, and Memphis can't all be mid-majors...that's like saying the Washington Generals and LA Lakers are 'in the same league' so to speak

The problem is not the top but the bottom. Losing the biggest brand (UConn) didn’t help either. UConn was the only school that had that old Big East feel. The AAC is basically C-USA 1.0. Nothing wrong with it. It’s the best basketball conference outside the P6.

(06-30-2020 08:18 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(06-30-2020 08:08 PM)UofMemphis Wrote:  when your conference features teams like Cincy, Memphis, WSU, Temple, Houston, Tulsa, etc I don't see any possible way to view it as mid-major

as someone else said Belmont, Cincy, and Memphis can't all be mid-majors...that's like saying the Washington Generals and LA Lakers are 'in the same league' so to speak

And it also depends on your time perspective. In recent years, if you say AAC is not a major, then the Pac 12 isn't either.

But at least they have won two championships in the last 25 years (UCLA and Arizona). The Big Ten hasn’t won the NCAAT since Michigan State did in 2000 (Maryland doesn’t count since they won it all in the ACC). So it’s been basically the Big East, ACC, SEC (Florida and Kentucky) and Big XII (Kansas).

When was the last time a current AAC team won a NC? Cincinnati in the 1950’s. Final Four without being vacated? I can only think of Wichita State recently.

I dont think it has anything to do with wins and losses...

I think it has to do with fan base size and markets...

The conference itself may not matter much.

There can be great programs in a small market, and a Mid Major conference. And there can be horrible programs in P5 conference's and large markets.

The point is, why does it matter?

(06-30-2020 09:57 PM)UTEPDallas Wrote:  

(06-30-2020 08:18 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(06-30-2020 08:08 PM)UofMemphis Wrote:  when your conference features teams like Cincy, Memphis, WSU, Temple, Houston, Tulsa, etc I don't see any possible way to view it as mid-major

as someone else said Belmont, Cincy, and Memphis can't all be mid-majors...that's like saying the Washington Generals and LA Lakers are 'in the same league' so to speak

And it also depends on your time perspective. In recent years, if you say AAC is not a major, then the Pac 12 isn't either.

But at least they have won two championships in the last 25 years (UCLA and Arizona). The Big Ten hasn’t won the NCAAT since Michigan State did in 2000 (Maryland doesn’t count since they won it all in the ACC). So it’s been basically the Big East, ACC, SEC (Florida and Kentucky) and Big XII (Kansas).

When was the last time a current AAC team won a NC? Cincinnati in the 1950’s. Final Four without being vacated? I can only think of Wichita State recently.

If we're going by July 2020 membership (including Louisville's vacated championship), the past 25 championships have included:

9 ACC
6 Big East
5 SEC
2 Pac-12
2 Big Ten
1 Big 12

Going by the leagues teams were in at the time:

8 ACC
7 Big East
5 SEC
2 Pac-12
1 Big Ten
1 Big 12
1 AAC

Either way, the ACC and Big East are the dominant leagues.

Even since the ACC expanded with Syracuse/Pitt and the AAC/Big East split, it's been 3 ACC national titles (by three separate teams), 2 Big East national titles, and 1 by an AAC team that was once in the Big East and is now going back there. Oh, and the last year before the AAC/Big East split? It was Louisville, a team that was in the Big East then and is now in the ACC.

Side note: how the Big Ten and Big 12 have come up short of national titles over this stretch despite have tons of highly ranked teams over the years is beyond me.

(06-30-2020 09:27 PM)Michael in Raleigh Wrote:  Just to get this out of the way, I'm well aware my school has not made it to the Big Dance since 2000 and plays in about the 12th-15thish best conference. So I know my school's place in hoops, although I am hopeful for the coming years under Dustin Kerns...

So, as an observer, I fully recognize the capabilities of AAC programs. Pretty much all of them not named ECU and Tulane can/should make the Tournament bare minimum once every five years or so. Most of them 3 out of every 5. Rattle off their names: Cincinnati, Memphis, Houston, Wichita State, Temple, SMU (under the right coach), Tulsa, UCF (under Johnny Dawkins), and even USF on occasion. That's a great list of basketball schools.

But what could be a 5-8 bid league, if enough teams would ever be good at the same time, has been more like a 3-4 bid league for most of the league's existence.

I'm not calling it mid-major. No one is saying Cincinnati = Belmont. I'm saying that its bid count is closer to what the A-10 has had than what the P5/Big East have had. And that is what separates, thus far, the P5/Big East from the AAC.

The AAC could be right on par with any conference in the NCAA, but it has come up short in its short history. At the AAC's best, it has been comparable to a P5/Big East league that's having a down year, like the ACC this past season. This is in spite of having what are clearly high, high major individual programs.

I agree fully with this. Well put, MinR.

(06-30-2020 08:08 PM)UofMemphis Wrote:  when your conference features teams like Cincy, Memphis, WSU, Temple, Houston, Tulsa, etc I don't see any possible way to view it as mid-major

as someone else said Belmont, Cincy, and Memphis can't all be mid-majors...that's like saying the Washington Generals and LA Lakers are 'in the same league' so to speak

WSU's success was all in the MVC, Temple's in the A-10, Houston's in the SWC, Tulsa's in the MVC and WAC. The AAC's right there, but they're not there yet. If they find a way to keep ahead of the Pac-12 and they have a legitimate, consistent power program I'll give it to them.

(06-30-2020 09:27 PM)Michael in Raleigh Wrote:  The AAC could be right on par with any conference in the NCAA, but it has come up short in its short history. At the AAC's best, it has been comparable to a P5/Big East league that's having a down year, like the ACC this past season. This is in spite of having what are clearly high, high major individual programs.

Yes, the AAC has under-performed in hoops during its existence. When the split occurred, the consensus was that basketball assets had basically been divided equally between the "new" Big East and new AAC, and that with their respective additions they would be essentially equal basketball leagues. But the Big East has easily out-performed the AAC. These are the AAC's RPI rankings for 2014 - 2020:

2014 .... 8
2015 .... 8
2016 .... 8
2017 .... 7
2018 .... 7
2019 .... 6
2020 .... 7

So those first three years, the AAC finished behind all the P6 leagues and the A10 as well. Since adding Wichita State to boost sagging hoops, they now consistently beat out all the other non-P conferences, and in 2019 beat out a P6 league, the PAC.

So it's fair to say that since adding WS, the AAC has improved to being better than the A10 and it is now the best non-P league. But that's IMO less than what was hoped for when the league was created.

(07-01-2020 08:58 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(06-30-2020 09:27 PM)Michael in Raleigh Wrote:  The AAC could be right on par with any conference in the NCAA, but it has come up short in its short history. At the AAC's best, it has been comparable to a P5/Big East league that's having a down year, like the ACC this past season. This is in spite of having what are clearly high, high major individual programs.

Yes, the AAC has under-performed in hoops during its existence. When the split occurred, the consensus was that basketball assets had basically been divided equally between the "new" Big East and new AAC, and that with their respective additions they would be essentially equal basketball leagues. But the Big East has easily out-performed the AAC. These are the AAC's RPI rankings for 2014 - 2020:

2014 .... 8
2015 .... 8
2016 .... 8
2017 .... 7
2018 .... 7
2019 .... 6
2020 .... 7

So those first three years, the AAC finished behind all the P6 leagues and the A10 as well. Since adding Wichita State to boost sagging hoops, they now consistently beat out all the other non-P conferences, and in 2019 beat out a P6 league, the PAC.

So it's fair to say that since adding WS, the AAC has improved to being better than the A10 and it is now the best non-P league. But that's IMO less than what was hoped for when the league was created.

Quo, you write "the consensus was that basketball assets had basically been divided equally between the "new" Big East and new AAC, and that with their respective additions they would be essentially equal basketball leagues."

I would think (maybe my memory fails me) the only folks back then who thought the two leagues would be "equal" in men's hoops were likely AAC apologists. I definitely did not think the two leagues would be equal, and I seriously doubt anybody who 1. knows college hoops and 2. is fair and reasonable would have thought that either at the time.

I do agree that AAC hoops has been disappointing — bordering on extremely disappointing. But (and as I've noted), I am very pleased with AAC football and baseball.

(07-01-2020 11:19 AM)bill dazzle Wrote:  

(07-01-2020 08:58 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(06-30-2020 09:27 PM)Michael in Raleigh Wrote:  The AAC could be right on par with any conference in the NCAA, but it has come up short in its short history. At the AAC's best, it has been comparable to a P5/Big East league that's having a down year, like the ACC this past season. This is in spite of having what are clearly high, high major individual programs.

Yes, the AAC has under-performed in hoops during its existence. When the split occurred, the consensus was that basketball assets had basically been divided equally between the "new" Big East and new AAC, and that with their respective additions they would be essentially equal basketball leagues. But the Big East has easily out-performed the AAC. These are the AAC's RPI rankings for 2014 - 2020:

2014 .... 8
2015 .... 8
2016 .... 8
2017 .... 7
2018 .... 7
2019 .... 6
2020 .... 7

So those first three years, the AAC finished behind all the P6 leagues and the A10 as well. Since adding Wichita State to boost sagging hoops, they now consistently beat out all the other non-P conferences, and in 2019 beat out a P6 league, the PAC.

So it's fair to say that since adding WS, the AAC has improved to being better than the A10 and it is now the best non-P league. But that's IMO less than what was hoped for when the league was created.

Quo, you write "the consensus was that basketball assets had basically been divided equally between the "new" Big East and new AAC, and that with their respective additions they would be essentially equal basketball leagues."

I would think (maybe my memory fails me) the only folks back then who thought the two leagues would be "equal" in men's hoops were likely AAC apologists. I definitely did not think the two leagues would be equal, and I seriously doubt anybody who 1. knows college hoops and 2. is fair and reasonable would have thought that either at the time.

I do agree that AAC hoops has been disappointing — bordering on extremely disappointing. But (and as I've noted), I am very pleased with AAC football and baseball.

The two leagues were clearly equal at the time of the split. DePaul and St. John's were awful. Providence and Seton Hall weren't doing well. Georgetown was not at their level of the 80s/90s. So it was Villanova and Marquette in the Big East.

AAC had Louisville and UConn with Temple, Memphis and Cincinnati doing well.

Syracuse, Pitt (in an up period), Villanova, Marquette, Louisville and UConn were the top teams before the disentegration.

(07-01-2020 12:43 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(07-01-2020 11:19 AM)bill dazzle Wrote:  

(07-01-2020 08:58 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(06-30-2020 09:27 PM)Michael in Raleigh Wrote:  The AAC could be right on par with any conference in the NCAA, but it has come up short in its short history. At the AAC's best, it has been comparable to a P5/Big East league that's having a down year, like the ACC this past season. This is in spite of having what are clearly high, high major individual programs.

Yes, the AAC has under-performed in hoops during its existence. When the split occurred, the consensus was that basketball assets had basically been divided equally between the "new" Big East and new AAC, and that with their respective additions they would be essentially equal basketball leagues. But the Big East has easily out-performed the AAC. These are the AAC's RPI rankings for 2014 - 2020:

2014 .... 8
2015 .... 8
2016 .... 8
2017 .... 7
2018 .... 7
2019 .... 6
2020 .... 7

So those first three years, the AAC finished behind all the P6 leagues and the A10 as well. Since adding Wichita State to boost sagging hoops, they now consistently beat out all the other non-P conferences, and in 2019 beat out a P6 league, the PAC.

So it's fair to say that since adding WS, the AAC has improved to being better than the A10 and it is now the best non-P league. But that's IMO less than what was hoped for when the league was created.

Quo, you write "the consensus was that basketball assets had basically been divided equally between the "new" Big East and new AAC, and that with their respective additions they would be essentially equal basketball leagues."

I would think (maybe my memory fails me) the only folks back then who thought the two leagues would be "equal" in men's hoops were likely AAC apologists. I definitely did not think the two leagues would be equal, and I seriously doubt anybody who 1. knows college hoops and 2. is fair and reasonable would have thought that either at the time.

I do agree that AAC hoops has been disappointing — bordering on extremely disappointing. But (and as I've noted), I am very pleased with AAC football and baseball.

The two leagues were clearly equal at the time of the split. DePaul and St. John's were awful. Providence and Seton Hall weren't doing well. Georgetown was not at their level of the 80s/90s. So it was Villanova and Marquette in the Big East.

AAC had Louisville and UConn with Temple, Memphis and Cincinnati doing well.

Syracuse, Pitt (in an up period), Villanova, Marquette, Louisville and UConn were the top teams before the disentegration.

The big problem was UConn, Memphis and Temple stunk up the joint since 2015. Had those schools played up to their tradition (along with UC, Houston, Wichita and SMU) the AAC would have been much stronger.

I haven't read this whole thread, so apologies if this has been brought up, but I liked the way College Hoops 2k8 judged conferences, Power conferene, major, mid major, and small major.

Power - P6

Major - AAC, A10, MWC

Mid Major/Small Major - The rest