• Welcome to BradleyFans.com! Visitors are welcome, but we encourage you to sign up and register as a member. It's free and takes only a few seconds. Just click on the link to Register at the top right of the page, and follow instructions. If you have any problems or questions, click on the link at the bottom right of the page to Contact Us.

Mid-majors in the NCAA Tournament

B

Bravesfan

New member
First, congrats to Memphis for becoming the second non-BCS team to make the Final Four in the last three years. I know they probably fit in the "major team from mid-major conference" category, but they are a non-BCS team nonetheless.

Second, congrats to Davidson for laying it all out on the court today against a formidable Kansas team. Great to see Bill Self finally get over the hump, but also sorry to see Davidson could not get that last shot down. It would have been nice to see a "lower-major" major team make the Final Four, but those are the breaks.

Irregardless of whether Davidson would have pulled this game out or not, I think the one thing to take away from this tournament is that the mid-majors not only belong in the tournament, they can win or compete if given the chance.

The one thing I do NOT want to ever, and I do mean EVER hear from these so-called "experts" again is that mid-majors don't belong in the tournament. If I ever hear something to the likes of "a mid-major team might win a game or two with the right draw, but the cream will eventually rise to the top" again from any of these people after the tournament that we have had this year, I will puke! I think the fact that these "mid-majors" performed so well this year when given the chance to play against BCS teams (and that includes Bradley defeating Virginia on the road in the CBI) shows that these "pundits" have lost all credibility!

Obviously our one obstacle that needs to be addressed is to get the selection committee to select more non-BCS teams to the tourney on a regular basis. The fact that non-BCS teams still get passed over by the middle of the road BCS teams shows that the committee is still out of touch with reality, all the more exposed by the results of this years tourney games.
 
Bravesfan said:
Irregardless of whether Davidson would have pulled this game out or not, I think the one thing to take away from this tournament is that the mid-majors not only belong in the tournament...
Click to expand...

indeed, and the games involving Davidson had by far the biggest TV audiences and generated the most press, the most interest...
The NCAA is shooting itself in the foot by leaving out so many fine mid-majors and giving them such bad seeds.
 
I really don't understand the uproar. Davidson was ranked in the top 25 as were some other mid-majors...and I don't remember hearing any analyst say mid-majors shouldn't be in the the tournament....the 4 number ones are in so I'd say the committee knew what they were doing.
It looks to be a very good finish for the tourney
 
lefty said:
I really don't understand the uproar. Davidson was ranked in the top 25 as were some other mid-majors...and I don't remember hearing any analyst say mid-majors shouldn't be in the the tournament....the 4 number ones are in so I'd say the committee knew what they were doing.
It looks to be a very good finish for the tourney
Click to expand...

I agree.
 
lefty said:
I really don't understand the uproar. Davidson was ranked in the top 25 as were some other mid-majors...and I don't remember hearing any analyst say mid-majors shouldn't be in the the tournament....the 4 number ones are in so I'd say the committee knew what they were doing.
It looks to be a very good finish for the tourney
Click to expand...

Just because the committee picked the right number 1 seeds isn't relevant to whether or not the non-BCS conferences get fair and objective consideration for an at-large bid. This year, the non-BCS schools got 6 of the 34 at-large bids. Based on how non-BCS schools have performed over the last 4-5 years (i.e., making the sweet 16 since that requires winning two games), non-BCS schools should get, on average, 8-9 at-large bids out of the 34 selected each year.
 
Last edited:
Dallas Brave said:
Just because the committee picked the right number 1 seeds isn't relevant to whether or not the non-BCS conferences get fair and objective consideration for an at-large bid. This year, the non-BCS schools got 6 of the 34 at-large bids. Based on how non-BCS schools have performed over the last 4-5 years (i.e., making the sweet 16 since that requires winning two games), non-BCS schools should get, on average, 8-9 at-large bids out of the 34 selected each year.
Click to expand...

well it's been debated to death for sure but i think the committe does a pretty good job for the most part. I don't know that anyone has come up with a perfect formula. This year Villanova was a bubble that many thought should not have got in and they were in the Sweet Sixteen so it looks like they were a good choice after all. There will always be some disagreement on who should be in..and if the NCAA took everyone then we would complain the mids get raw deal on the seeds...so there will always be something.....which makes boards like this necessary to solve the world's problems:-D
 
tornado said:
indeed, and the games involving Davidson had by far the biggest TV audiences and generated the most press, the most interest...
The NCAA is shooting itself in the foot by leaving out so many fine mid-majors and giving them such bad seeds.
Click to expand...

Let's face it T...the world loves the underdog in ANY sport. If I remember right many of the analysts were hyping Davidson before the tourney started....
By the way T...Davidson player Brian Barr's twin brothers played for Olivet graduating 3 years ago....
 
I just wanna say... I saw a lot of empty seats at the Davidson/Kansas game today.

If it had been Kansas/Kentucky... I believe every seat woulda been filled. But the fans woulda seen a bad game.
 
lefty said:
well it's been debated to death for sure but i think the committe does a pretty good job for the most part. I don't know that anyone has come up with a perfect formula. This year Villanova was a bubble that many thought should not have got in and they were in the Sweet Sixteen so it looks like they were a good choice after all. There will always be some disagreement on who should be in..and if the NCAA took everyone then we would complain the mids get raw deal on the seeds...so there will always be something.....which makes boards like this necessary to solve the world's problems:-D
Click to expand...

I agree its a tough job for the committee. My take on it though is that there is enough statistical evidence of non-BCS team perfromance to slot 8-9 at-large slots for them every year. That leaves 25-26 at-large slots for the six BCS conferences, so they will always be sending at least their top 4 teams from each conference. Having 16 teams in a conference, like the Big East has, should be discouraged.

Edit Update:
With the allocation above, each BCS conference, on average, would send at least 4 at-large teams and the their respective tournament champ ... or at least five teams from each conference. Having 30-32 BCS teams is very equitable in my opinion.
 
Bravesfan said:
First, congrats to Memphis for becoming the second non-BCS team to make the Final Four in the last three years. I know they probably fit in the "major team from mid-major conference" category, but they are a non-BCS team nonetheless.
Click to expand...

Calling Memphis mid-major is bull****. I don't care what conference they're from.

The problem is for every mid major that makes a run, there's a bubble team that got in that makes a run. Davidson was an autobid so you have to be careful with this argument.
 
TheAsianSensation said:
Calling Memphis mid-major is bull****. I don't care what conference they're from.

The problem is for every mid major that makes a run, there's a bubble team that got in that makes a run. Davidson was an autobid so you have to be careful with this argument.
Click to expand...


Ummmmmmmmmm, he didn't call Memphis a mid-major AsiaMan
erm.gif
 
lefty said:
and I don't remember hearing any analyst say mid-majors shouldn't be in the the tournament....
Click to expand...

Jay Bilas for one:

"If you're in a major conference you're going to get hammered for not going out and killing yourself in the non-conference. Let's be honest about it. If you're in a mid-major they're going to give you a break. That's OK, I just wish they'd admit it: They give the mid-majors a break. It's OK, but let's not go through this charade of it being the 34 best teams because I don't think that's what we're getting."
 
Dallas Brave said:
My take on it though is that there is enough statistical evidence of non-BCS team perfromance to slot 8-9 at-large slots for them every year.
Click to expand...

I don't like this statement at all. TEAMS should get bids, not a "category" of teams. This is no different than when a talking head says "the Big Ten should get 5 bids," which is also a bogus statement. Each team needs to be evaluated for their body of work individually. I think the number of mid-majors taken as at-large teams should be determined by the overall quality of teams each season. Slotting a certain number of bids for mid-majors is as dumb as doing the same thing for BCS teams.

I don't really see any reason for uproar here. How many mid-majors with good resumes were left out this season? Maybe Dayton and Illinois State, although each of those teams had holes in their body of work. I don't see a huge issue with the way things are currently done. As we've all witnessed, a mid-major can make noise in the tournament as currently constructed.
 
mportsch said:
I don't like this statement at all. TEAMS should get bids, not a "category" of teams. This is no different than when a talking head says "the Big Ten should get 5 bids," which is also a bogus statement. Each team needs to be evaluated for their body of work individually. I think the number of mid-majors taken as at-large teams should be determined by the overall quality of teams each season. Slotting a certain number of bids for mid-majors is as dumb as doing the same thing for BCS teams.

I don't really see any reason for uproar here. How many mid-majors with good resumes were left out this season? Maybe Dayton and Illinois State, although each of those teams had holes in their body of work. I don't see a huge issue with the way things are currently done. As we've all witnessed, a mid-major can make noise in the tournament as currently constructed.
Click to expand...

Absolutely. Nobody was left out this year that had a legitimate gripe.

MacabreMob said:
I just wanna say... I saw a lot of empty seats at the Davidson/Kansas game today.
Click to expand...

I noticed that as well.
 
Well, Davidson only has 1700 students, and I am sure their fan base isn't too amazingly large. I did expect to see more KU fans though.
 
ctt8410 said:
Jay Bilas for one:

"If you're in a major conference you're going to get hammered for not going out and killing yourself in the non-conference. Let's be honest about it. If you're in a mid-major they're going to give you a break. That's OK, I just wish they'd admit it: They give the mid-majors a break. It's OK, but let's not go through this charade of it being the 34 best teams because I don't think that's what we're getting."
Click to expand...

Bilas would tell you that even mediocre teams from a power conference like the ACC would dominate in a midmajor conference like the MVC. In fact, he says this all the time in defense of his argument that the entire ACC and Big East deserve to be in the tournament ahead of the 2nd place teams in conferences like the MVC and CAA.

Well, we just saw how well that logic worked last week when Bradley dismantled Virginia on their home court.
 
lefty said:
Let's face it T...the world loves the underdog in ANY sport. If I remember right many of the analysts were hyping Davidson before the tourney started....
By the way T...Davidson player Brian Barr's twin brothers played for Olivet graduating 3 years ago....
Click to expand...

I think the committee did OK this year, but in years gone by with the exclusion of Missouri State, etc...I think the mid-majors have gotten a raw deal.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top