"Mid-Majors"

A place to chat about that other college sport during the football off-season.
Forum rules
NOTICE: Please be sure to check the CFP Message Board Rules and Regulations and the Read Me page before posting.
User avatar
Jason G
Head Coach
Head Coach
Posts: 1141
Joined: Fri Dec 30, 2005 2:07 am
Location: Pataskala, OH

"Mid-Majors"

Postby Jason G » Fri Jan 27, 2006 9:03 pm

I think everyone will agree that the Missouri Valley Conference will send multiple teams to the NCAA tournament and that the West Coast Conference will also if Gonzaga doesn't win the conference tournament, but what other "mid-major" or "low major" conferences do you think will get multiple bids to the big dance? Which ones do you think deserve multiple teams?

User avatar
Eric
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 10287
Joined: Thu Dec 29, 2005 1:51 am

Postby Eric » Sat Jan 28, 2006 10:38 pm

Well, let's take a look at teams that have the slightest reason for an argument to make the tournament:

America East:

Albany


Atlantic Sun:

Lipscomb


Atlantic 10:

George Washington
Xavier
Charlotte


Big Sky:

Montana


Big South:

Birmingham Southern/Winthrop


Big West:

Pacific


Colonial Athletic:

Old Dominion
UNC Wilmington
George Mason


Horizon League:

Wisconsin-Milwaukee


Ivy League:

Penn/Yale


Metro Atlantic:

Iona


MAC:

Buffalo
Akron
Kent State
Ohio


MEAC:

Florida A&M/Deleware State/Bethune-Cookman


Mid Continent:

IUPUI/Valpo/Oral Roberts


Missouri Valley:

Northern Iowa
Witchita State
Southern Illinois
Creighton


Mountain West:

Air Force
San Diego State
New Mexico/Colorado State


Northeast:

Robert Morris/Central Connecticut State/Wagner


Ohio Valley:

Tennessee Tech


Patriot League:

Bucknell


Southern:

Chattanooga/Georgia Southern/Davidson/Furman/Charleston (I don't think this is a great conference, but it is deep with possible conference contenders)


Southland:

Sam Houston State/Lamar/Northwestern State


Sun Belt:

Western Kentucky
South Alabama


SWAC:

Southern/Jackson State


WAC:

Nevada
Utah State
Louisiana Tech


WCC:

Gonzaga


So, overall, I don't think there are any other conferences that deserve more bids besides the MAC. They seem to have solid teams year in and year out. And when deciding between a Big East team that is one game below .500 in conference play or a 3rd place MAC team, they should start thinking a little more about that MAC team. A team like Buffalo, for example, I think should've been in the tournament last year. I was kind of suprised that Ohio was the only team from the conference. I think the depth of the MAC really hurt them because there were about 5 11-7 teams. Miami OH, Kent State, Buffalo, Western Michigan, and Toledo were some good teams that got part of that log jam, and I guess it would've been hard to decide if any of them should get a tournament bid. It would've been difficult to pick from them I think.

By the way, when I did the "/", it meant they'd be conference champs. The others below them I was saying they'd have an argument for an at-large, a 12 or 11 seed.
Running bowl/MSU/OSU record '05-present: 11-32

User avatar
Eric
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 10287
Joined: Thu Dec 29, 2005 1:51 am

Postby Eric » Sun Jan 29, 2006 9:44 am

Yeah, take a look at some of the for-real teams over the past few years from the A10:

UMass
Temple
Xavier
George Washington
St. Joe's
Dayton

I think it is a solid conference, and I think the addition of Charlotte will be a good move. I think they'll be a pretty legit basketball team, they've made the tournament a couple times. They're a nice basketball team.
Running bowl/MSU/OSU record '05-present: 11-32

User avatar
Jason G
Head Coach
Head Coach
Posts: 1141
Joined: Fri Dec 30, 2005 2:07 am
Location: Pataskala, OH

Postby Jason G » Sun Jan 29, 2006 7:38 pm

Good point aboutthe parity in the league last year in the MAC Eric. I believe the 9th seed in the MAC tournament last year had a 10-8 conference record which put them only a couple games out of first.

But how can this league have only one bid each of the last five years? It is a much better league than that. Apparently a couple of teams need to run away to the top of the standings to get multiple teams in the big dance.
In other words it may actually be beneficial to the MAC if the teams in the middle of the pack and at the bottom of the standings were actually weaker and less likely to pull off an upset. It just doesn't seem right that it may possibly be better for the conference if some of the teams weren't as good as they are now.

User avatar
Eric
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 10287
Joined: Thu Dec 29, 2005 1:51 am

Postby Eric » Tue Jan 31, 2006 12:23 am

Yep. The MAC was logjammed with solid and overachieving teams like Toledo and Akron, maybe Miami OH (not positive about the record).

Had the bottom and lower middle pack of the MAC been weaker, they probably would've had Ohio, Buffalo, and any one of those 11-7 teams (Akron, Toledo, Western Michigan, etc.). I think the selection committee needs to start making some tough decisions about picking a MAC team from that pack. They need to start getting 2 or 3 teams representing the conference in the Big Dance, because that is the scale on which you base how good conferences are.
Running bowl/MSU/OSU record '05-present: 11-32

User avatar
Jason G
Head Coach
Head Coach
Posts: 1141
Joined: Fri Dec 30, 2005 2:07 am
Location: Pataskala, OH

Postby Jason G » Fri Feb 03, 2006 8:19 pm

Miami won the regular season title in the MAC last year but didn't make the championship game in the tourney. I believe they were the best team, in terms of RPI, to ever be left out of the 64 or 65 team NCAA tournament.

I thought the RedHawks and Buffalo should have gotten into the Big dance along with the auto bid winner Ohio University. Buffalo was the hottest team at the end of the season and lost the conf. championship game on a tip-in at the buzzer.

User avatar
Eric
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 10287
Joined: Thu Dec 29, 2005 1:51 am

Postby Eric » Sat Feb 04, 2006 11:38 pm

I thought Buffalo should've been in the tournament last year instead of a team like St. Mary's or Creighton. Don't get me wrong, last year those two schools were good, but were they as good as Buffalo or St. Joe's? I know that St. Joe's didn't have any real quality wins, but they did so good in their conference down the stretch and they showed they were one of the two best teams to miss the tournament in the NIT last year. But, Buffalo deserved a bid.

This year, I think the MAC just might get the respect it deserves. I think Kent State, I think Buffalo is pretty good this year, correct me if I'm wrong Jason G, and Akron/Ohio. One of those two teams will seperate with the rest of the pack, and be bubble teams. Will they make it? Probably not. But they'll be considered.

If Buffalo, Akron, Kent State, and I think Ohio is playing on Bracket Buster Saturday, if they win, it'll be a big W for the MAC. I think Akron can beat Nevada, that's an upset to watch for.
Running bowl/MSU/OSU record '05-present: 11-32

User avatar
Jason G
Head Coach
Head Coach
Posts: 1141
Joined: Fri Dec 30, 2005 2:07 am
Location: Pataskala, OH

Postby Jason G » Mon Feb 06, 2006 8:07 pm

Going into this past Saturday it appeared that Kent state and Akron were trying to seperate themselves from the rest of the pack. Both teams were 9-1 in the confrence two games ahead of Miami. Kent pulled out the win in their place over my Zips by six points in a game which Akron led most of the way.
People around the MAC are saying that Ohio and Buffalo have struggled in the MAC because they are in fourth and fifth place respectively. I only half agree. I think it has as much to do with strength of the divison opponents as anything.

Current MAC Standings (as of 2/6/2006)

EAST MAC Overall
Kent State 10-1 16-6
Akron 9-2 16-5
Miami 9-3 12-8
Ohio 7-4 13-6
Buffalo 5-6 15-7
Bowling Green 4-7 8-13

WEST MAC Overall
Northern Illinois 8-4 13-7
Western Michigan 6-5 9-12
Toledo 4-8 11-9
Ball State 3-8 7-12
Eastern Michigan 2-9 5-14
Central Michigan 1-11 3-17

I'm not sure of the exact schedules of all the teams but I know each of the East Division teams has a one game left with every other division opponent. For my Zips we still have to travel to Miami and Buffalo and we welcome BG, Ohio, and Kent State into the Rubber City. The Kent State game is the last game of the regular season.

I'm just hoping that my Zips make a postseason tourney for the first time since 1988 when they barely lost to Ohio State in the NIT first round. Our last NCAA apperance was a game where we blew a late lead against a highly regarded Michigan team in 1987.
Our schedule has certainly been tough enough this year with our five losses being at Ohio, at Kent State, at Cal, at Louisville, and on a neutral floor against then undefeated Clemson. Akron did beat an SEC foe in Mississippi State.

OK, I think I've shown enough pride in my alma mater and in the conference for now. Sorry for rambling everybody!

User avatar
Eric
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 10287
Joined: Thu Dec 29, 2005 1:51 am

Postby Eric » Mon Feb 06, 2006 8:30 pm

Well, I for one think that Akron is going to be dancing into March. They'll be a 10 or 11 seed.

If the Zips miss out, they'd be my dark horse pick to win the NIT. I really think they could pull that one out. They also could suprisingly end up in the Sweet 16. I think one team that is a lock for a Sweet 16 team is Miami. The Hurricanes will do well in March, I think they'll get a 7 seed and upset the 2 seed in the second round. We always seem to get a 7/10 over 2 or 8/9 over 1 in a tournament. I'd look out for Miami, they'll be a good tournament team. Just a feeling.
Running bowl/MSU/OSU record '05-present: 11-32

User avatar
Jason G
Head Coach
Head Coach
Posts: 1141
Joined: Fri Dec 30, 2005 2:07 am
Location: Pataskala, OH

Postby Jason G » Thu Feb 09, 2006 1:01 am

I like the way you're thinking about my Zips, who pulled back into a first place tie again tonight by the way.

As far as mid-seeded tourney team that may bear looking out for I would have to add Alabama and Marquette to Miami. Of course, all of this is hard to project before the brackets come out. Who knows? They all three could be put in the same region!

User avatar
Eric
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 10287
Joined: Thu Dec 29, 2005 1:51 am

Postby Eric » Thu Feb 09, 2006 2:18 pm

I think the MAC is going to get 2 teams in the tournament this year. There is usually an opening for an at-large somewhere for an 11 seed. If there aren't too many upsets, such as a WCC team from the pack upsetting Gonzaga, giving Gonzaga an at-large bid, then the MAC should get 2 teams in. Who knows? If the 3rd place team seperates themselves from the rest of the pack, we could look at 3 MAC teams. I think if Akron handles Nevada on the Bracketbuster games, they'll be fine whether they win the conference or not, they'll be in as an at-large. If they don't, well, that shows how flat out disrespected this conference is.
Running bowl/MSU/OSU record '05-present: 11-32

User avatar
Jason G
Head Coach
Head Coach
Posts: 1141
Joined: Fri Dec 30, 2005 2:07 am
Location: Pataskala, OH

Postby Jason G » Thu Feb 09, 2006 6:47 pm

It truly is a disrespected conference in both basketball and football. At least in football a lot of the games are being televised nationally on weeknights during the season. I think that exposure can only help.

In basketball giving the MAC one bid gives them the same representation as leagues like the Southland and MEAC (no offense intended to those leagues). I think most everyone can agree that MAC schools are closer in talent to the bigger conference schools than "low major" schools are to the MAC.

Just a few years ago if the MAC regular season champ didn't win the conference tourney they could feel extremely confident that multiple bids would be given to the league. I'm not sure why (certainly isn't based on talent), but this seems to have changed somewhat in the last 3-5 years.

Eric, I hope you are correct in your assessment of the MAC's postseason hopes but I guess I have become just a little pessimistic with the way things have gone for the league with respect to the NCAA tournament recently. At least the NIT seems to love having MAC schools! Only problem there is they rarely get home games in that tourney.

User avatar
Eric
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 10287
Joined: Thu Dec 29, 2005 1:51 am

Postby Eric » Fri Feb 10, 2006 1:24 pm

I hope I am too, I like the MAC as a conference. They have some very good athletics to offer. I forgot to say that one bid for the conference makes them look like a MEAC team or a NEC team. I think the worst MAC team could beat the MEAC or the SWAC champion 9 out of 10 times. There are majors, mid-majors, and low-majors like you said, and the MAC is way better than a one bid league!
Running bowl/MSU/OSU record '05-present: 11-32

User avatar
Jason G
Head Coach
Head Coach
Posts: 1141
Joined: Fri Dec 30, 2005 2:07 am
Location: Pataskala, OH

Postby Jason G » Sat Feb 11, 2006 5:13 pm

Well put.

Now how do we convince the "powers that be" to that fact? The BracketBusters event may be huge for the MAC and it looks like the Akron-Nevada match-up may be the headliner as far the MAC is concerned.

User avatar
Eric
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 10287
Joined: Thu Dec 29, 2005 1:51 am

Postby Eric » Sun Feb 19, 2006 11:33 pm

Jason, as much as it hurts me to say this, the MAC got burned on Bracketbuster Saturday. Ohio didn't play too well against Samford of all teams, Akron played terribly (certainly not their best game), Kent State almost lost to Butler (BUTLER!), and Buffalo got massacred by Iona.

Yikes.
Running bowl/MSU/OSU record '05-present: 11-32


Return to “College Basketball”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 15 guests