So the mid-majors

[Cusefan0307]

I’d say the PAC 12 is more mid major than the Big East.

 

[Waltdods]

One conference is in question, the PAC-12.

There's clearly a huge seperation in CFB/CBB between the ACC/SEC/B1G/Big XII and the rest.

The B1G hasn't won a basketball championship in Darius Bazley's lifetime. The idea that it's somehow head and shoulders above the Big East (which just won a NC two years ago and is much more likely to do so again this year) seems hard to support.

 

[SoBeCuse]

I’d say the PAC 12 is more mid major than the Big East.

Yeah, the Oregon St and Wash St type programs are basically mid-majorish.

Gonzaga is a power now. Cincinnati and Xavier (especially this past decade) are players. Go walk the UC campus...that is no mid-major.

 

[orangecuse]

facilities are the #1 indicator

Ok, cuz that facility that VT plays in isn't like playing in a Barn.

 

[nzm136]

only 4 mid-majors made it to the sweet 16; Villanova, Gonzaga, Loyola-Chicago and Nevada. And Nevada beat another mid-major (Cincy) to get there.

The committee can keep giving the mid-majors high seeds and the P5 will continue sending them home early.

that is all

Calling Nova a mid major is a little much. The BIG EAST is a top basketball conference.

But yes, mid majors are incredibly overrated.

 

[moqui]

Ok, cuz that facility that VT plays in isn't like playing in a Barn.

plural

 

[longislandcuse]

The B1G hasn't won a basketball championship in Darius Bazley's lifetime. The idea that it's somehow head and shoulders above the Big East (which just won a NC two years ago and is much more likely to do so again this year) seems hard to support.

That's fine. I'd call them a power program in a mid-major conference. Nova is top notch, their league is not. I'm sorry, Butler, Xavier, Providence and Seton Hall don't do it for me.

 

[Knicks411]

I’d say the PAC 12 is more mid major than the Big East.

It's crazy, the Pac 12 got 3 teams in the tournament this year, 2 of them played (and lost) in the first four, and Arizona went out in round 1. Which is a long way of saying they got 0 teams to the round of 32. That's crazy to me, I get anything can happen in the tournament, but you're a power league and you get 1 team in the full field of 64??

 

[supp]

The gap between P5 and everyone else makes much more sense in football with its 85 player rosters than it does in basketball. There will always be strong non-P5 programs in the NCAA tournament as long as the P5 is part of the tournament. There will also be years when a non-P5 conference will outperform P5 conferences. The SEC for a whole bunch of years has been just UK, Florida and then a huge drop-off to the rest. The last PAC12 champion was more than 20 years ago. The last B1G champ was nearly 20 years ago. The BE/AAC in roughly the same period won 7 championships.

 

[SBU72]

I can understand saying the top 4 or 5 teams are better than many of the mid majors (P12 excluded) but I dispute that teams 6, 7, 8 or 9 in P5 conferences are significantly better or just better than the #2 or 3 from many of the mid-majors. Those P5 teams get in just for being in P5. They get significantly more chances to prove themselves than mid-majors.