ADVERTISEMENT

Which mid-major teams have the rosiest 2016-17 outlooks?

SpiderHoops32

SpiderHoops32

Team Manager
Jan 10, 2014
2,043
798
113
ESPN Insider article..... just kind of reiterates the same sh*t we've been saying since March. Put those rose colored glasses on!!

One difficulty attached to reading or writing about college basketball in May is that we still don't know with certainty which players will be back next season and which will go pro (or try). The good news is this uncertainty is somewhat less pronounced when looking at mid-majors. With the occasional exception (noted below), we already have a good grasp on the cast of mid-major characters for 2016-17.

I took a good, long look at those players, and here are my rankings of the top 10 mid-majors for next season.

1) Saint Mary's Gaels
2) Dayton Flyers
3) Gonzaga Bulldogs
4) Rhode Island Rams
5) Wichita State Shockers
6) VCU Rams
7) Harvard Crimson
8) Valparaiso Crusaders
9) Princeton Tigers
i

10. Richmond Spiders

This was an outstanding offense in 2015-16, but Richmond really struggled on defense. If coach Chris Mooney can get some stops from the likes of ShawnDre' Jones and T.J. Cline, the Spiders could return to the NCAA tournament for the first time since 2011.
 
Last edited:
Take note all the Valpo haters out there...also, I almost don't count WS and VCU as "mid-major" given the size of the institutions alone, and the fact that they are public universities. All the others are private, most relatively small.
 
keefusb said:
Take note all the Valpo haters out there...also, I almost don't count WS and VCU as "mid-major" given the size of the institutions alone, and the fact that they are public universities. All the others are private, most relatively small.
Click to expand...

Rhode Island is also public and large (16,000 students), but haven't been to the NCAAs in ~20 years so they are easy to forget.
 
I will say this about URI, Hurley is the best recruiter in the conference. No team has consistently had as many 3* and 4* recruits as URI which is why we have been hearing about how good they are going to be for the past 4 years. But that is what makes his lack of postseasons so far so much more damning.

Hurley has made one NIT in his first four years, if he does not make the NCAAs next year he will join a very short list of A10 coaches who did not make the NCAAs in their first 5 years. Given what he has to work with I can't help but think he just isn't a good coach (besides recruiting). Even with Hassan and EC hurt last year URI should have been one of the top 3 teams in the conference based on their players.
 
fan2011 said:
I will say this about URI, Hurley is the best recruiter in the conference. No team has consistently had as many 3* and 4* recruits as URI which is why we have been hearing about how good they are going to be for the past 4 years. But that is what makes his lack of postseasons so far so much more damning.

Hurley has made one NIT in his first four years, if he does not make the NCAAs next year he will join a very short list of A10 coaches who did not make the NCAAs in their first 5 years. Given what he has to work with I can't help but think he just isn't a good coach (besides recruiting). Even with Hassan and EC hurt last year URI should have been one of the top 3 teams in the conference based on their players.
Click to expand...
It's interesting considering he comes from true coaching DNA...perhaps what Hurley Sr. taught at St. Anthony's didn't stick as well as one might expect.
 
Was Bobby Hurley propping him up at Wagner and URI before he set out on his own? Jury is still out on Bobby. Maybe ADs are in love with the name?
 
I saw that the Richmond Basketball twitter tooted this horn yesterday too. Acceptance of the mid major moniker is just another step toward loserdom. Think VCU was bragging about being in this list?
 
  • Like
Reactions: SpiderK
MolivaManiac said:
I saw that the Richmond Basketball twitter tooted this horn yesterday too. Acceptance of the mid major moniker is just another step toward loserdom. Think VCU was bragging about being in this list?
Click to expand...
It means you are always struggling for the 4 or 5 at large bids mid majors get.
 
keefusb said:
also, I almost don't count WS and VCU as "mid-major" given the size of the institutions alone, and the fact that they are public universities. All the others are private, most relatively small.
Click to expand...

I've never seen this spin on mid-major.

It's always been about conference affiliation. The major conferences and then the mid-majors then the rest. The dileanation originally I think was meant as a compliment by basketball "analysts" to suggests certain schools that didn't play in the ACC or Big East were still powerful. They were basically majors but just not in a major league. It was a positive.

That shifted quickly as it became kind of a bucket to throw all of the schools that were less-thans but still in decent basketball conferences. Rather then an school here or there the leagues started to be referred to as mid-majors. As far as I remember, school size, being public or private institutions, never had anything to do with it besides the fact state schools mostly make up the big conferences. Duke, Stanford, Notre Dame, at one point Georgetown and the rest of the formerly powerful Big East schools all were "majors." Though at this point, (ignoring Villanova's one off success this year) you could argue the Big East is now as much a mid-major league as the A10.
 
The Vault said:
I've never seen this spin on mid-major.

It's always been about conference affiliation. The major conferences and then the mid-majors then the rest. The dileanation originally I think was meant as a compliment by basketball "analysts" to suggests certain schools that didn't play in the ACC or Big East were still powerful. They were basically majors but just not in a major league. It was a positive.

That shifted quickly as it became kind of a bucket to throw all of the schools that were less-thans but still in decent basketball conferences. Rather then an school here or there the leagues started to be referred to as mid-majors. As far as I remember, school size, being public or private institutions, never had anything to do with it besides the fact state schools mostly make up the big conferences. Duke, Stanford, Notre Dame, at one point Georgetown and the rest of the formerly powerful Big East schools all were "majors." Though at this point, (ignoring Villanova's one off success this year) you could argue the Big East is now as much a mid-major league as the A10.
Click to expand...

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mid-major
 
In short, you are either P5, Big East or a mid major. Ergo, members of the A10 and other conferences are mid majors. I thought this was understood? OSC
 
Ulla1 said:
In short, you are either P5, Big East or a mid major. Ergo, members of the A10 and other conferences are mid majors. I thought this was understood? OSC
Click to expand...
Some people consider the big east mid-major too. Some people don't consider the a10 mid major. There is no one accepted definition of the term. The only constant is if you are P5 or not.
 
urmite said:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mid-major
Click to expand...

Decent article. Sense some MVC bias in there and disagree with some of the writer(s)' assertions (it is wikipedia afterall). Mid-major definitely carries a bit of a stigma now to those called it, but agree that the general perception is that it refers to any competent conference outside the BCS or Power 5. AAC, Gonzaga, Big East, A10, MVC and some others can quibble all we want but perception is reality, and outside of our bubbles the perception differs from our pov. In fact, that group probably best defines the concept of midmajor, even if we try and label our lessers with it.

I'd argue though as a bucket, mid-majors does not comprise the rest of the conferences including one off teams from lesser leagues. Even those that are somewhat sustained outliers to their conference's general performance (see Belmont or Winthrop runs). Seems pretty obvious there are three tiers to college basketball and as much as we want to be on the bottom of the first tier we probably are top of the second.

On the other hand, definitions are fluid, blah, blah, blah. It's all semantics.

I just want to be called one thing. NCAA tournament team. That's it. No confusing that one.
 
  • Like
Reactions: urfan1
P5 is more for football. P5 is ACC, Big 10, Big 12, PAC 12, and SEC.
if you google P7 for basketball, they add the Big East and the A10. that should be the general rule for high major.

but it's not perfect. there's no way you can argue that the lesser programs of the A10 or even the Big East are high major. and you leave out some programs like Gonzaga, UConn, Memphis, etc ... which are high major programs.
 
spiderman said:
P5 is more for football. P5 is ACC, Big 10, Big 12, PAC 12, and SEC.
if you google P7 for basketball, they add the Big East and the A10. that should be the general rule for high major.

but it's not perfect. there's no way you can argue that the lesser programs of the A10 or even the Big East are high major. and you leave out some programs like Gonzaga, UConn, Memphis, etc ... which are high major programs.
Click to expand...
With their recent success the Big East is in 6th for now, and the A-10 seems to be competing with the AAC for 7th.

A lot of people look at either average number of NCAA teams or TV revenue to separate the tiers...
 
I thought it was generally accepted that no a10 member institution would refer to themselves as a mid-major. I guess we didn't get that memo. But I guess any press is worth tooting our horn during the streak we're on of no NCAA appearances.
 
we can call ourselves whatever we want, but the basketball world doesn't lump us in with the high major programs.
 
spiderman said:
we can call ourselves whatever we want, but the basketball world doesn't lump us in with the high major programs.
Click to expand...
You are correct, spiderman. Perhaps the A10 members would be appropriately called "high mid majors". OSC
 
In the exempt tournaments, we are lumped in with the major programs. For example, this year, the Barclay's Classic has UR, Maryland, Kansas State, and Boston College. Last year, at the Las Vegas Invitational, ,we were in the hosts bracket, and played West Virginia and California. East Carolina from the AAC was in the visitors brackets, with the lesser program. We ARE a major program.
 
TBSpyder said:
In the exempt tournaments, we are lumped in with the major programs. For example, this year, the Barclay's Classic has UR, Maryland, Kansas State, and Boston College. Last year, at the Las Vegas Invitational, ,we were in the hosts bracket, and played West Virginia and California. East Carolina from the AAC was in the visitors brackets, with the lesser program. We ARE a major program.
Click to expand...
Well in that case, TB, Roll Spide!
 
TBSpyder said:
In the exempt tournaments, we are lumped in with the major programs. For example, this year, the Barclay's Classic has UR, Maryland, Kansas State, and Boston College. Last year, at the Las Vegas Invitational, ,we were in the hosts bracket, and played West Virginia and California. East Carolina from the AAC was in the visitors brackets, with the lesser program. We ARE a major program.
Click to expand...
The fourth in Vegas was San Diego State from the Mountain West.
 
A major national basketball writer on a major national news outlet says that we are on the right side of the NCAA bubble and a top 4 team in the A10 after a 16-16 season where we lose three starters and the fifth-best rebounder in school history...and we're arguing the semantics of the term that some copy editor used to headline the article?

.....ok.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ur2K
You must log in or register to reply here.
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT
Top Bottom
Back