[Cracked Sidewalks] Mid-Major Madness?

[brewcity77]

In recent years there has been a decline in the number of at-large bids given to mid & low-major programs. To figure out why, I dug into the makeup of the Selection Committee since the field expanded to 68 in 2011. There was a significant reduction in the number of bids earned by smaller conference starting in 2014. So what happened to cause this change? Quite simply, the Big East.

http://www.crackedsidewalks.com/2019/02/mid-major-madness.html

[SaveOD238]

This article focused mostly on the change in the composition of the selection committee, but I think there's an even simpler explanation.

In/around 2014 the total number of high major teams increased, and many of the mid-major programs that regularly snagged tournament bids became high-major programs.  How many bids have Xavier, Creighton, Butler, Houston, SMU, TCU, and Memphis (etc.) earned since 2014?  Hell, even Tulsa won a bid a few years back that previously would have been considered "mid-major."

[We R Final Four]

I think around here at least the American Conference is considered mid-major.

[Galway Eagle]

This article focused mostly on the change in the composition of the selection committee, but I think there's an even simpler explanation.

In/around 2014 the total number of high major teams increased, and many of the mid-major programs that regularly snagged tournament bids became high-major programs.  How many bids have Xavier, Creighton, Butler, Houston, SMU, TCU, and Memphis (etc.) earned since 2014?  Hell, even Tulsa won a bid a few years back that previously would have been considered "mid-major."

I think this is also worth noting. The A10 with X and Temple would occasionally have years where the A10 was ranked higher than some major conferences same with the MWC which has fallen off a cliff. Plus the MVC lost their two banner teams with CU and WSU.

[Mr. Nielsen]

I think around here at least the American Conference is considered mid-major.

When people say mid-major you think MVC, OVC, WCC, MAC, MAAC, Sun Belt. The American is not in that pool. Also, there is news that a new TV news is coming out in the next couple of weeks. Words has it that it will be around $5 to $10 million per school.

[SaveOD238]

I think around here at least the American Conference is considered mid-major.

In the article it was listed as one of the high-major programs, and I tend to agree.  A core of Houston, Memphis, UConn, Cincinnati, SMU, Temple, and Wichita State is pretty strong historically in basketball, plus UCF is ascendant in all sports right now.  The bottom of the conference is not great, but only Tulane and East Carolina are below 125 in kenpom right now.

[HowardsWorld]

Brew and I talked about this in another thread and while there may be some truth behind the high mid majors taking spots like Xavier, Butler, etc. those are not taking away anything from teams that lose in their conference tournament but won their regular season tournament.

What annoys me the most about the selection process is that they are far more likely to take a 8th-9th best team from a conference over a team that finished 29-5 losses in their conference tournament but has a lower RPI/NR. To me you need to reward someone that goes 29-5 its not easy to do that even in a weaker conference as you more than likely have lesser players so it evens out. Furthermore, a team that goes 18-14 or 19-14/15 has had ample opportunities to pick up big wins which they clearly didn't if they are taking 11 seeds or 12 seeds and shrinking the bubble. A team that finishes in the bottom half of your conference and literally 3 to 4 games over .500 does not deserve to be there no matter what point/metrics you wish to make other believe they belong.

[We R Final Four]

When people say mid-major you think MVC, OVC, WCC, MAC, MAAC, Sun Belt. The American is not in that pool. Also, there is news that a new TV news is coming out in the next couple of weeks. Words has it that it will be around $5 to $10 million per school.

Others on this board have suggested that the P6 are high major....everyone else is mid major.
They will tell you UConn and Cincy and co. are mid majors based exclusively upon their conference affiliation.

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

Has the American ever finished in the top 5 conferences in a season? I honestly don't know but until they start doing that at least every once a while I wouldn't consider them a high major conference. Of course the PAC 12 may force me to reevaluate that definition.

Honestly, the old Mountain West and A10 used to be much stronger than the American has ever been and no one ever considered them high majors. Hell, Conference USA used to be stronger than the American has ever been. I think the presence of Cincy and UConn makes people want to make the American better than it is.

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

Others on this board have suggested that the P6 are high major....everyone else is mid major.
They will tell you UConn and Cincy and co. are mid majors based exclusively upon their conference affiliation.

I think there is reasonable debate back and forth on whether or not the American is a high major conference. Personally, I think they have a lot more in common with the A10, MVC, MWC, and WCC then they do with the P6 (though the PAC 12 has been bucking that trend lately).

But yes, a program in a mid major conference is a mid major. That's not a bad thing, it's just a thing. Gonzaga is a mid-major. They are one of the best programs in college basketball and a mid-major. The two are not mutually exclusive.

[Its DJOver]

Brew and I talked about this in another thread and while there may be some truth behind the high mid majors taking spots like Xavier, Butler, etc. those are not taking away anything from teams that lose in their conference tournament but won their regular season tournament.

What annoys me the most about the selection process is that they are far more likely to take a 8th-9th best team from a conference over a team that finished 29-5 losses in their conference tournament but has a lower RPI/NR. To me you need to reward someone that goes 29-5 its not easy to do that even in a weaker conference as you more than likely have lesser players so it evens out. Furthermore, a team that goes 18-14 or 19-14/15 has had ample opportunities to pick up big wins which they clearly didn't if they are taking 11 seeds or 12 seeds and shrinking the bubble. A team that finishes in the bottom half of your conference and literally 3 to 4 games over .500 does not deserve to be there no matter what point/metrics you wish to make other believe they belong.

Do you mean under?  3 to 4 games over .500 in any major conference should be good enough for a bid, almost regardless of the non-con.  You would need a lot of 300+ NET opponents or multiple bad losses to miss out with a 11-7 or better conference record.

[Galway Eagle]

Has the American ever finished in the top 5 conferences in a season? I honestly don't know but until they start doing that at least every once a while I wouldn't consider them a high major conference. Of course the PAC 12 may force me to reevaluate that definition.

Honestly, the old Mountain West and A10 used to be much stronger than the American has ever been and no one ever considered them high majors. Hell, Conference USA used to be stronger than the American has ever been. I think the presence of Cincy and UConn makes people want to make the American better than it is.

I don't think it's just Cincy and UConn. I think it's that there's 7 or 8 teams actually that have really strong basketball traditions and usually that means there's enough staying power to make the conference a power conference but so many of those teams are a fraction of what they once were (UConn, Memphis, Temple, Tulsa, Wichita State) imagine a year where all those programs played to what they were in the BE, CUSA, A10 and MVC. It'd actually be a pretty tough conference.

[HowardsWorld]

Do you mean under?  3 to 4 games over .500 in any major conference should be good enough for a bid, almost regardless of the non-con.  You would need a lot of 300+ NET opponents or multiple bad losses to miss out with a 11-7 or better conference record.

No I meant over like 18-14. The way teams stack up wins in the non conference against bad teams 18-14 probably means you played under .500 or .500 in conference.

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

I don't think it's just Cincy and UConn. I think it's that there's 7 or 8 teams actually that have really strong basketball traditions and usually that means there's enough staying power to make the conference a power conference but so many of those teams are a fraction of what they once were (UConn, Memphis, Temple, Tulsa, Wichita State) imagine a year where all those programs played to what they were in the BE, CUSA, A10 and MVC. It'd actually be a pretty tough conference.

Maybe, but I suspect that the thing that trips most people up is Cincy and Uconn being "demoted" to a mid-major. They were both high majors in the Big East and the idea that a high major could become a mid-major overnight is what some don't agree with. All the other teams you mentioned have some good tradition, but they have always been mid-major programs.

South Florida was also a high major but they've been so bad for so long that I think that one doesn't bother people.

[Its DJOver]

No I meant over like 18-14. The way teams stack up wins in the non conference against bad teams 18-14 probably means you played under .500 or .500 in conference.

I see, I misinterpreted you original post.  I still think you should look at it on a case by case basis, and a lot of the time those 18 win high major teams have better resumes than the 22+ win low majors, not always, but more often than the other way around.  For example, the top of the American East has two teams at 22-6, one will get the auto bid, and the other will likely be NIT bound, their 22-6 is not as good as Seton Hall's current 16-11 IMO.

[MUMountin]

I think there is reasonable debate back and forth on whether or not the American is a high major conference. Personally, I think they have a lot more in common with the A10, MVC, MWC, and WCC then they do with the P6 (though the PAC 12 has been bucking that trend lately).

But yes, a program in a mid major conference is a mid major. That's not a bad thing, it's just a thing. Gonzaga is a mid-major. They are one of the best programs in college basketball and a mid-major. The two are not mutually exclusive.

IMO, a major conference is defined by two things: competitive balance internally and externally. 

As to the first, I would loosely define it as having a majority of the teams competitive for a NCAA tourney bid within a four-year cycle.  The American has assembled a decent group of schools with good tradition, and might be getting there on this measure, with Houston, Cincinnati, Temple, Memphis, Wichita St., UConn, SMU, and Tulsa all receiving bids in recent years (and UCF looking like it this year).  Really, just East Carolina, Tulane, and USF are the only terrible programs since the reformation, but we all have our DePauls.  I think this competitive balance is important because it means that there is an overall commitment to basketball in the conference.

For the second, I think you can look at (1) the metrics ranking leagues and (2) NCAA bids.  Its on this measure that the American hasn't shown consistency/strength.  They've been ranked 7th (or worse) in every year except this one (thanks P12!).  I think that to be truly considered a "Power" conference (or whatever term we want to use in basketball), they need to be able to move up and down in at least the 4-6 range. 

The American has also only had two years with more than 3 bids (although they should get four this year).  Even their seeding has been relatively low, with only two protected seeds in five years (one of which was a 4 seed to Louisville during its transition year). 

So, it seems like the American has basically fallen into no-man's land between the top 6 conferences and the mid-major conferences.  I don't think I'd call them a mid-major, but it is tough to call them a Power conference either.

[JamilJaeJamailJrJuan]

I think around here at least the American Conference is considered mid-major.

The AAC isn't a mid major.  Its a pretty dang solid conference.  The top half is pretty strong, but it weighted down by some pure garbage (Tulane and ECU and to a slightly lesser extent USF and Tulsa).  UCONN being hot garbage for several seasons hasn't happened either.

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

The AAC is the new A10 IMHO. When we split, we took the best A10 teams, and the AAC took the A10's spot as the "best of the rest." The A10 got pushed down the pecking order to where the MWC used to be, the MWC got pushed down to where the MVC used to be, and the MVC has now joined the rest of the 1 bid conferences. The A10 used to regularly get 3+ teams in the tournament and often finished ranked in the top 5 conferences. Yet no one ever considered them a high major. The AAC has never gotten more the 3 teams in the tournament and always finishes 6th or lower in the conference rankings. If high major status is determined on results, I just don't see how you could say the AAC is a high major conference. If you use different criteria for defining a high major, then maybe you have an argument.

[cheebs09]

The AAC is the new A10 IMHO. When we split, we took the best A10 teams, and the AAC took the A10's spot as the "best of the rest."

Poor Dayton

[Silkk the Shaka]

The AAC is the new A10 IMHO. When we split, we took the best A10 teams, and the AAC took the A10's spot as the "best of the rest." The A10 got pushed down the pecking order to where the MWC used to be, the MWC got pushed down to where the MVC used to be, and the MVC has now joined the rest of the 1 bid conferences. The A10 used to regularly get 3+ teams in the tournament and often finished ranked in the top 5 conferences. Yet no one ever considered them a high major. The AAC has never gotten more the 3 teams in the tournament and always finishes 6th or lower in the conference rankings. If high major status is determined on results, I just don't see how you could say the AAC is a high major conference. If you use different criteria for defining a high major, then maybe you have an argument.

This is the correct assessment