Tweet
Joe Lunardi from ESPN.com has provided his explanation of a mid-major. His feeling is that it should depend on expectations and performance. This is an ESPN Insider article, but here is the link:
He defines three groups within the national landscape of college basketball.....
??? HIGH-MAJOR: Conferences that compete at the highest level and expect multiple NCAA Tournament appearances on an annual basis.
??? MID-MAJOR: Conferences that are generally very competitive and who hope for at-large bids in a good year.
??? LOW-MAJOR: The annual one-bid conferences, and there is little if anything these leagues can do to alter that reality.
He also provides a table of conference rankings (by RPI), sorted by the average number of NCAA bids earned by each conference.....I have only provided the high and mid major listing.
Conference Rankings
CONFERENCE AVG. RANK, 1996-2007 AVG. NCAA BIDS PER SEASON
High Major
SEC 2.58 5.50
Big Ten 3.50 5.50
Big East 4.00 5.42
Big 12 (since 1997) 4.36 5.09
ACC 2.17 4.92
Pac-10 5.58 4.50
Conference USA 8.08 3.42
Atlantic 10 9.33 3.00
Mountain West (since 2000) 8.13 2.25
WAC 9.67 2.25
Missouri Valley 10.25 2.17
Mid-Major
West Coast 12.83 1.42
Horizon/MCC 15.00 1.42
Mid-American 12.83 1.17
Colonial 14.08 1.17
Big West 18.00 1.08
His comments regarding the MVC.....
??? The biggest conference shift in this era is the upgrade of the Missouri Valley, in my view, from mid to high major status. The Valley, which led the parade of mid-majors less than a decade ago, has joined the first tier in terms of both expectations and performance.
He also makes specific reference to Gonzaga as a high-major (despite the WCC being considered a mid-major) and Western Kentucky, Davidson and Winthrop as mid-major, despite their conferences being considered low-major.
So there you have it.....the MVC should be considered a high-major league. Now, we just need to get out of that dang Bracketbuster event!
He defines three groups within the national landscape of college basketball.....
??? HIGH-MAJOR: Conferences that compete at the highest level and expect multiple NCAA Tournament appearances on an annual basis.
??? MID-MAJOR: Conferences that are generally very competitive and who hope for at-large bids in a good year.
??? LOW-MAJOR: The annual one-bid conferences, and there is little if anything these leagues can do to alter that reality.
He also provides a table of conference rankings (by RPI), sorted by the average number of NCAA bids earned by each conference.....I have only provided the high and mid major listing.
Conference Rankings
CONFERENCE AVG. RANK, 1996-2007 AVG. NCAA BIDS PER SEASON
High Major
SEC 2.58 5.50
Big Ten 3.50 5.50
Big East 4.00 5.42
Big 12 (since 1997) 4.36 5.09
ACC 2.17 4.92
Pac-10 5.58 4.50
Conference USA 8.08 3.42
Atlantic 10 9.33 3.00
Mountain West (since 2000) 8.13 2.25
WAC 9.67 2.25
Missouri Valley 10.25 2.17
Mid-Major
West Coast 12.83 1.42
Horizon/MCC 15.00 1.42
Mid-American 12.83 1.17
Colonial 14.08 1.17
Big West 18.00 1.08
His comments regarding the MVC.....
??? The biggest conference shift in this era is the upgrade of the Missouri Valley, in my view, from mid to high major status. The Valley, which led the parade of mid-majors less than a decade ago, has joined the first tier in terms of both expectations and performance.
He also makes specific reference to Gonzaga as a high-major (despite the WCC being considered a mid-major) and Western Kentucky, Davidson and Winthrop as mid-major, despite their conferences being considered low-major.
So there you have it.....the MVC should be considered a high-major league. Now, we just need to get out of that dang Bracketbuster event!
Comment