Good Article on the tourney

[soccer_dawg9]

Here's a free article from ESPN Insider that talks about how the different conferences have fared in the past decade or so.


http://insider.espn.go.com/ncb/ncaat...ory?id=2308853

[KSDAWG]

Great article. I don't mind being in one of the two top mid-major teams.

[champion110]

I will know that we are doing great when we drop the name "mid major". There are no mid major teams in basketball. Everything is D1. The title "mid major" comes from the media and BCS football conferences. We have accepted it without questioning it.

We are a MAJOR team in a MAJOR basketball conference. If you are D1 in BBAll, you are major.

Don't let them get another one over on us like they did the bcs. There is no official designation of "major" and "mid major".

JUST WIN!

[boxerdog]

I will know that we are doing great when we drop the name "mid major". There are no mid major teams in basketball. Everything is D1. The title "mid major" comes from the media and BCS football conferences. We have accepted it without questioning it.

We are a MAJOR team in a MAJOR basketball conference. If you are D1 in BBAll, you are major.

Don't let them get another one over on us like they did the bcs. There is no official designation of "major" and "mid major".

JUST WIN!

So, would you say Grambling is a MAJOR team in a MAJOR conference? Be thankful we're in a mid-major conference, otherwise, we wouldn't be able to up our chances at an at-large by participating in a Bracketbuster. Again, "mid major" serves to distinguish between us and the "low major" which have no shot whatsoever at an at-large bid.

[champion110]

So, would you say Grambling is a MAJOR team in a MAJOR conference? Be thankful we're in a mid-major conference, otherwise, we wouldn't be able to up our chances at an at-large by participating in a Bracketbuster. Again, "mid major" serves to distinguish between us and the "low major" which have no shot whatsoever at an at-large bid.

No, actually the term mid major is no different than the term "bcs", except that it is not officially a term like "bcs" is. It is an attempt at separation.

In football, Grambling is division 1aa. That makes them a lower tier school in football. In basketball, they are D1a. That makes them in the same division as Tech, Duke, Alabama, or Memphis. It should be a level playing field, with some teams and conferences being better and some being not as good - as it happens naturally. Tell me what the term "mid major" means. Does it mean that the school is smaller than a "major"? Does it mean that it is not in a bcs conference in football? What about schools like Duke? Are they a mid major? Is Memphis? Does it mean that the conference rpi is lower or higher? It goes both ways on that issue and conferences are different each year.

I resent any term that attempts to hold us back. It is time to fight this designation and let the team and conference speak for itself. In football, we ask for a level playing field and to get rid of the corrupt bcs. The next step in bball is for the so called "major" conferences to go the same route.

Time to stop using the term! If you go to any successful so called "mid major" team and ask if they like the term, they will say no. Ask the Souther Illinois fans how they like it. Ask the Gonzaga's and Nevada's how they like it. I bet you will get plenty of responses. It is time to stop thinking we are "mid" in anything.

[boxerdog]

Listen, it's difficult for the selection committee to determine which of the numerous conferences is strongest. Just because somebody has a gaudy record in the Southland doesn't mean they're better than somebody with a decent record in the Mountain West.

Your idealism has blinded you. If you can't comprehend why the "major" conferences get more consideration, I'm through arguing. History has proven that the ACC and Big East and whatever else are strong, you do well in those, you're in the tournament. But, it's hard to decipher with those conferences that are traditionally weaker.

Believe it or not, a "mid-major" team can outgrow the mid-major label by consistently accomplishing in the postseason. Gonzaga is proof positive of that this year. They've been ranked in the top ten all year long. Without the emergence of "mid-major", we have no shot at an at-large bid. Why is this so difficult to comprehend?

[boxerdog]

BTW, if I were Southern Illinois this year, I would resent playing in the Bracketbuster too. Gonzaga doesn't have to play in it. Fact is, Southern Illinois can only hurt themselves by playing this game, not help.

[JAY]

the mvc i think should work out a deal with espn.

make sure their top 3 or 4 teams play at home or they dont play. in return, they get their other + .500 teams in. those are the teams that really need it.

[champion110]

Listen, it's difficult for the selection committee to determine which of the numerous conferences is strongest. Just because somebody has a gaudy record in the Southland doesn't mean they're better than somebody with a decent record in the Mountain West.

Your idealism has blinded you. If you can't comprehend why the "major" conferences get more consideration, I'm through arguing. History has proven that the ACC and Big East and whatever else are strong, you do well in those, you're in the tournament. But, it's hard to decipher with those conferences that are traditionally weaker.

Believe it or not, a "mid-major" team can outgrow the mid-major label by consistently accomplishing in the postseason. Gonzaga is proof positive of that this year. They've been ranked in the top ten all year long. Without the emergence of "mid-major", we have no shot at an at-large bid. Why is this so difficult to comprehend?

So, what you are saying is that a mid major is not defined as that by the conference they are in (you gave the example of Gonzaga outgrowing that title). Then you turn around and say it is defined by the conference you are in. Did I get you right on that.

You may not want to argue this and you may disagree, but I am part of a growing number of fans that believe that the title should go away.

Also, you state that certain "major" conferences are better than certain "mid major" ones. Why do you think that is? It is because of tradition and recruiting. Having the title of "mid major" keeps you in certain recruiting circles. It is the same as "bcs" vs. non-bcs. Having that title helps you or hurts you.

Please don't think that I am trying to change your mind, but please don't act like I am out in left field with this, either. Go look around and see if this isn't a growing issue.

[boxerdog]

So, what you are saying is that a mid major is not defined as that by the conference they are in (you gave the example of Gonzaga outgrowing that title). Then you turn around and say it is defined by the conference you are in. Did I get you right on that.

You may not want to argue this and you may disagree, but I am part of a growing number of fans that believe that the title should go away.

Also, you state that certain "major" conferences are better than certain "mid major" ones. Why do you think that is? It is because of tradition and recruiting. Having the title of "mid major" keeps you in certain recruiting circles. It is the same as "bcs" vs. non-bcs. Having that title helps you or hurts you.

Please don't think that I am trying to change your mind, but please don't act like I am out in left field with this, either. Go look around and see if this isn't a growing issue.

Let me ask you something, please answer me point blank. Does the SWAC regular season champion deserve an at-large bid if they don't win the conference tournament?

Can you understand a distinction between a mid-major and a low-major conference? I said some programs can transcend the mid-major label even while being in a mid-major conference (eg: Gonzaga).

The teams that are up in arms about the label are teams on the verge of transcending it (Southern Illinois). Guess what? We are not one of those teams. If we weren't able to participate in a Bracketbuster, we wouldn't have a good shot at making the tournament without winning the conference tournament. The Bracketbuster is good for Louisiana Tech. And the entire concept has been spawned from the idea of "mid major".

[altadawg]

champion, surely your energy can be directed towards something more important.

We are a Mid-major team in a Mid-major conference. Football, basketball, you name it. You need to get over it.

[boxerdog]

champion, surely your energy can be directed towards something more important.

We are a Mid-major team in a Mid-major conference. Football, basketball, you name it. You need to get over it.

No doubt. I'm wanting champion to spearhead the movement to put the Dunkin' Dawgs forum above the Lady Techsters forum on Bulldogs Barks & Bytes. That would be more productive.

[champion110]

Let me ask you something, please answer me point blank. Does the SWAC regular season champion deserve an at-large bid if they don't win the conference tournament?

Can you understand a distinction between a mid-major and a low-major conference? I said some programs can transcend the mid-major label even while being in a mid-major conference (eg: Gonzaga).

The teams that are up in arms about the label are teams on the verge of transcending it (Southern Illinois). Guess what? We are not one of those teams. If we weren't able to participate in a Bracketbuster, we wouldn't have a good shot at making the tournament without winning the conference tournament. The Bracketbuster is good for Louisiana Tech. And the entire concept has been spawned from the idea of "mid major".

Does the SWAC regular season champion deserve an at large bid, if they don't win the tournament? It depends. Right now, they don't. In the future they might. They would probably stand a better chance at recruiting if the title of "minor" conference were taken away. If they can earn a good rpi, then they will get an at-large bid. It has nothing to do with the label of the conference. It has to do with the level of competion in your OOC and conference. If their conference improves, like many have, they deserve a bid.

Look, I know that we are not Duke, OK. We are Louisiana Tech and there is no reason at all that we cannot be just as good as Duke one day, though. Level the playing field and we stand a better chance.

Again, what is your definition of "mid major"?

I will find some links for you to read about the growing controversy about this, if you wish. However, all you have to do is type into google search and find tons of it. You can even find many different definitions of it.

Alta,
Can I find something better to spend my time doing? Yeah.... Arguing with people that are satisfied with lesser made up labels and don't think in bigger terms is somewhat like beating my head against a wall.

Again, sorry if you disagree with me on this. I don't have to have the same opinion as you. I don't like the title and never will.

[champion110]

Gonzaga Athletic Director, Mike Roth, on the term "mid-major":

"To me it becomes, for lack of a better term, an oxymoron. It just doesn't make sense. Should St. Joseph have been a mid-major when they were the first- or second-ranked team in the country for most of the year?"

[champion110]

According to some sources, we are a "high" major and NOT a mid major conference in basketball.

http://www.answers.com/topic/college-basketball

and

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mid_Maj...or_Conferences