Memphis was #9 in the RPI. Our close road loss to them could be helpful with regard to seeding in the NCAA or getting a bid to another postseason tournament.
I didn't respond to the post below, but I still consider Gonzaga a midmajor program. They play in a conference comparable to the Belt. Memphis has been a major program for many years. It isn't really their fault that Conference USA has pretty much deteriorated around them. It used to be one of the top conferences with Louisville, Cinci, Memphis, Marquette, etc.
(02-08-2009 01:28 AM)mjs Wrote: [ -> ]Memphis was #9 in the RPI. Our close road loss to them could be helpful with regard to seeding in the NCAA or getting a bid to another postseason tournament.
I didn't respond to the post below, but I still consider Gonzaga a midmajor program. They play in a conference comparable to the Belt. Memphis has been a major program for many years. It isn't really their fault that Conference USA has pretty much deteriorated around them. It used to be one of the top conferences with Louisville, Cinci, Memphis, Marquette, etc.
For starters, let me say for the record that I hate the term mid-major.
But since it's out there, what is the definition of a mid-major, and how can Memphis not be a mid-major and Gonzaga be a mid-major? Is it Gonzaga's fault that they are in a conference that you consider mid-major and it's not Memphis' fault to be in a conference that is considered mid-major. The West Coast Conference put three team into the big dance last year. The Conference USA put in one.
I don't think most people, including all the talking heads on TV, regard Gonzaga as a mid-major anymore. They play a heavy big dog schedule in non-conference and win a lot of those games. If they are mid-major, then what in your opinion would they have to accomplish to have the label removed from them?
(02-08-2009 10:25 AM)PTJR Wrote: [ -> ] (02-08-2009 01:28 AM)mjs Wrote: [ -> ]Memphis was #9 in the RPI. Our close road loss to them could be helpful with regard to seeding in the NCAA or getting a bid to another postseason tournament.
I didn't respond to the post below, but I still consider Gonzaga a midmajor program. They play in a conference comparable to the Belt. Memphis has been a major program for many years. It isn't really their fault that Conference USA has pretty much deteriorated around them. It used to be one of the top conferences with Louisville, Cinci, Memphis, Marquette, etc.
For starters, let me say for the record that I hate the term mid-major.
But since it's out there, what is the definition of a mid-major, and how can Memphis not be a mid-major and Gonzaga be a mid-major? Is it Gonzaga's fault that they are in a conference that you consider mid-major and it's not Memphis' fault to be in a conference that is considered mid-major. The West Coast Conference put three team into the big dance last year. The Conference USA put in one.
I don't think most people, including all the talking heads on TV, regard Gonzaga as a mid-major anymore. They play a heavy big dog schedule in non-conference and win a lot of those games. If they are mid-major, then what in your opinion would they have to accomplish to have the label removed from them?
Probably get out of a conference that is as "middle of the pack" as you can get, 15th in the RPI rankings. You make some good points, as I probably didn't consider the great UNLV teams as a midmajor, despite their being in the weak Big West at the time. I just view Memphis as different than Gonzaga, maybe because they have been a player on the national seen as far back as I can remember. Gonzaga is still relatively new on the national scene- will they still be there in 10 years? Who knows, but I bet Memphis will just becasue of their recruiting base.
(02-08-2009 10:53 AM)mjs Wrote: [ -> ] (02-08-2009 10:25 AM)PTJR Wrote: [ -> ] (02-08-2009 01:28 AM)mjs Wrote: [ -> ]Memphis was #9 in the RPI. Our close road loss to them could be helpful with regard to seeding in the NCAA or getting a bid to another postseason tournament.
I didn't respond to the post below, but I still consider Gonzaga a midmajor program. They play in a conference comparable to the Belt. Memphis has been a major program for many years. It isn't really their fault that Conference USA has pretty much deteriorated around them. It used to be one of the top conferences with Louisville, Cinci, Memphis, Marquette, etc.
For starters, let me say for the record that I hate the term mid-major.
But since it's out there, what is the definition of a mid-major, and how can Memphis not be a mid-major and Gonzaga be a mid-major? Is it Gonzaga's fault that they are in a conference that you consider mid-major and it's not Memphis' fault to be in a conference that is considered mid-major. The West Coast Conference put three team into the big dance last year. The Conference USA put in one.
I don't think most people, including all the talking heads on TV, regard Gonzaga as a mid-major anymore. They play a heavy big dog schedule in non-conference and win a lot of those games. If they are mid-major, then what in your opinion would they have to accomplish to have the label removed from them?
Probably get out of a conference that is as "middle of the pack" as you can get, 15th in the RPI rankings. You make some good points, as I probably didn't consider the great UNLV teams as a midmajor, despite their being in the weak Big West at the time. I just view Memphis as different than Gonzaga, maybe because they have been a player on the national seen as far back as I can remember. Gonzaga is still relatively new on the national scene- will they still be there in 10 years? Who knows, but I bet Memphis will just becasue of their recruiting base.
Getting out of a conference that is "middle of the pack" is easier said than done. Just ask Memphis who really wanted to be included in the Big East but wasn't. I think that a team that has become a regular in the NCAA tournament and has had considerable success there, should no longer be saddled with the derogatory mid-major term.
(02-08-2009 11:19 AM)PTJR Wrote: [ -> ] (02-08-2009 10:53 AM)mjs Wrote: [ -> ] (02-08-2009 10:25 AM)PTJR Wrote: [ -> ] (02-08-2009 01:28 AM)mjs Wrote: [ -> ]Memphis was #9 in the RPI. Our close road loss to them could be helpful with regard to seeding in the NCAA or getting a bid to another postseason tournament.
I didn't respond to the post below, but I still consider Gonzaga a midmajor program. They play in a conference comparable to the Belt. Memphis has been a major program for many years. It isn't really their fault that Conference USA has pretty much deteriorated around them. It used to be one of the top conferences with Louisville, Cinci, Memphis, Marquette, etc.
For starters, let me say for the record that I hate the term mid-major.
But since it's out there, what is the definition of a mid-major, and how can Memphis not be a mid-major and Gonzaga be a mid-major? Is it Gonzaga's fault that they are in a conference that you consider mid-major and it's not Memphis' fault to be in a conference that is considered mid-major. The West Coast Conference put three team into the big dance last year. The Conference USA put in one.
I don't think most people, including all the talking heads on TV, regard Gonzaga as a mid-major anymore. They play a heavy big dog schedule in non-conference and win a lot of those games. If they are mid-major, then what in your opinion would they have to accomplish to have the label removed from them?
Probably get out of a conference that is as "middle of the pack" as you can get, 15th in the RPI rankings. You make some good points, as I probably didn't consider the great UNLV teams as a midmajor, despite their being in the weak Big West at the time. I just view Memphis as different than Gonzaga, maybe because they have been a player on the national seen as far back as I can remember. Gonzaga is still relatively new on the national scene- will they still be there in 10 years? Who knows, but I bet Memphis will just becasue of their recruiting base.
Getting out of a conference that is "middle of the pack" is easier said than done. Just ask Memphis who really wanted to be included in the Big East but wasn't. I think that a team that has become a regular in the NCAA tournament and has had considerable success there, should no longer be saddled with the derogatory mid-major term.
I don't necessarily consider it a derogatory term. The question is "what does it mean?", and I don't have an answer. No doubt Gonzaga has had incredible success in recent years. But they play in a weak conference, a 5000 seat arena, and probably don't have near the budget of BCS schools- which is probably what that label is based on. I might look at the midmajor tag as a badge of honor if I were Gonzaga- A small private school, a small arena, a weak conference, lower budget; but still they regularly beat the so-called "majors".
(02-08-2009 11:32 AM)mjs Wrote: [ -> ] (02-08-2009 11:19 AM)PTJR Wrote: [ -> ] (02-08-2009 10:53 AM)mjs Wrote: [ -> ] (02-08-2009 10:25 AM)PTJR Wrote: [ -> ] (02-08-2009 01:28 AM)mjs Wrote: [ -> ]Memphis was #9 in the RPI. Our close road loss to them could be helpful with regard to seeding in the NCAA or getting a bid to another postseason tournament.
I didn't respond to the post below, but I still consider Gonzaga a midmajor program. They play in a conference comparable to the Belt. Memphis has been a major program for many years. It isn't really their fault that Conference USA has pretty much deteriorated around them. It used to be one of the top conferences with Louisville, Cinci, Memphis, Marquette, etc.
For starters, let me say for the record that I hate the term mid-major.
But since it's out there, what is the definition of a mid-major, and how can Memphis not be a mid-major and Gonzaga be a mid-major? Is it Gonzaga's fault that they are in a conference that you consider mid-major and it's not Memphis' fault to be in a conference that is considered mid-major. The West Coast Conference put three team into the big dance last year. The Conference USA put in one.
I don't think most people, including all the talking heads on TV, regard Gonzaga as a mid-major anymore. They play a heavy big dog schedule in non-conference and win a lot of those games. If they are mid-major, then what in your opinion would they have to accomplish to have the label removed from them?
Probably get out of a conference that is as "middle of the pack" as you can get, 15th in the RPI rankings. You make some good points, as I probably didn't consider the great UNLV teams as a midmajor, despite their being in the weak Big West at the time. I just view Memphis as different than Gonzaga, maybe because they have been a player on the national seen as far back as I can remember. Gonzaga is still relatively new on the national scene- will they still be there in 10 years? Who knows, but I bet Memphis will just becasue of their recruiting base.
Getting out of a conference that is "middle of the pack" is easier said than done. Just ask Memphis who really wanted to be included in the Big East but wasn't. I think that a team that has become a regular in the NCAA tournament and has had considerable success there, should no longer be saddled with the derogatory mid-major term.
I don't necessarily consider it a derogatory term. The question is "what does it mean?", and I don't have an answer. No doubt Gonzaga has had incredible success in recent years. But they play in a weak conference, a 5000 seat arena, and probably don't have near the budget of BCS schools- which is probably what that label is based on. I might look at the midmajor tag as a badge of honor if I were Gonzaga- A small private school, a small arena, a weak conference, lower budget; but still they regularly beat the so-called "majors".
I just call it good basketball. Something we want at UALR too.
(02-08-2009 11:32 AM)mjs Wrote: [ -> ] (02-08-2009 11:19 AM)PTJR Wrote: [ -> ] (02-08-2009 10:53 AM)mjs Wrote: [ -> ] (02-08-2009 10:25 AM)PTJR Wrote: [ -> ] (02-08-2009 01:28 AM)mjs Wrote: [ -> ]Memphis was #9 in the RPI. Our close road loss to them could be helpful with regard to seeding in the NCAA or getting a bid to another postseason tournament.
I didn't respond to the post below, but I still consider Gonzaga a midmajor program. They play in a conference comparable to the Belt. Memphis has been a major program for many years. It isn't really their fault that Conference USA has pretty much deteriorated around them. It used to be one of the top conferences with Louisville, Cinci, Memphis, Marquette, etc.
For starters, let me say for the record that I hate the term mid-major.
But since it's out there, what is the definition of a mid-major, and how can Memphis not be a mid-major and Gonzaga be a mid-major? Is it Gonzaga's fault that they are in a conference that you consider mid-major and it's not Memphis' fault to be in a conference that is considered mid-major. The West Coast Conference put three team into the big dance last year. The Conference USA put in one.
I don't think most people, including all the talking heads on TV, regard Gonzaga as a mid-major anymore. They play a heavy big dog schedule in non-conference and win a lot of those games. If they are mid-major, then what in your opinion would they have to accomplish to have the label removed from them?
Probably get out of a conference that is as "middle of the pack" as you can get, 15th in the RPI rankings. You make some good points, as I probably didn't consider the great UNLV teams as a midmajor, despite their being in the weak Big West at the time. I just view Memphis as different than Gonzaga, maybe because they have been a player on the national seen as far back as I can remember. Gonzaga is still relatively new on the national scene- will they still be there in 10 years? Who knows, but I bet Memphis will just becasue of their recruiting base.
Getting out of a conference that is "middle of the pack" is easier said than done. Just ask Memphis who really wanted to be included in the Big East but wasn't. I think that a team that has become a regular in the NCAA tournament and has had considerable success there, should no longer be saddled with the derogatory mid-major term.
I don't necessarily consider it a derogatory term. The question is "what does it mean?", and I don't have an answer. No doubt Gonzaga has had incredible success in recent years. But they play in a weak conference, a 5000 seat arena, and probably don't have near the budget of BCS schools- which is probably what that label is based on. I might look at the midmajor tag as a badge of honor if I were Gonzaga- A small private school, a small arena, a weak conference, lower budget; but still they regularly beat the so-called "majors".
I believe non-BCS would be a better title than mid-major. I think that those items you mentioned...budget, arena size, conference affiliation, and student population would be the determining factor as to why a program is considered a mid-major or not. The fact that a team can defeat teams from larger conferences only adds to the luster of that program. I have no problem with UALR being a mid-major. I just want us to be a top mid-major program.
They ought just to say non-BCS.
UNLV was in the Big Sky or the WAC when they were rolling?
Is the WCC realy a mid-major? They will get at least 2 in the ncaa and at least 2 in the nit, right? Last year at the end of the year they had two teams in the top twenty five?
Memphis is just a weird spot. The BB team is a top tier team but their is not conference to join around them. CUSA is probably on par or not much better than the Belt if you take Memphis out of the picture. If you talk football, the belt is probably on par with them now.
I don't remember when the big east was losing two teams to the ACC and added CUSA teams (Marquette and Depaul), if the big east wanted another football team. Which brings up the real question of how long will the Big East teams like ND going field a BB team as good as this years that could probably be in the top 3 in the Big 10 but will finish in the bottom half of the big east?
(02-08-2009 02:14 PM)insideualr Wrote: [ -> ]UNLV was in the Big Sky or the WAC when they were rolling?
Is the WCC realy a mid-major? They will get at least 2 in the ncaa and at least 2 in the nit, right? Last year at the end of the year they had two teams in the top twenty five?
Memphis is just a weird spot. The BB team is a top tier team but their is not conference to join around them. CUSA is probably on par or not much better than the Belt if you take Memphis out of the picture. If you talk football, the belt is probably on par with them now.
I don't remember when the big east was losing two teams to the ACC and added CUSA teams (Marquette and Depaul), if the big east wanted another football team. Which brings up the real question of how long will the Big East teams like ND going field a BB team as good as this years that could probably be in the top 3 in the Big 10 but will finish in the bottom half of the big east?
Yes the WCC is a midmajor. Half their teams RPI's are over 200. The only teams above 100 are Gonzaga (#38) and St. Mary's (#60). They will likely get one team in the NCAA just like the Sun Belt. Possibly 2, if Gonzaga gets upset in their Tourney, but they will be on the bubble if that happens. They need to stay above 40, and they will drop a bunch if they lose to anybody but St. Mary's.