Welcome to The Holy Land of Hoops

I'll try to help get some discussion going. Would our new league of 12-14 teams be considered a Top 4 or Top 5 league? It will be almost impossible to crack the Top 2 with the Big Ten and ACC, but we could certainly rival the PAC12, SEC and Big12. I don't think there is any way we would be considered a non-major either which would help for recruiting and TV deals.

I think based on past track records, it would be a top 5 league perennially and 4-5 bids a year (in a 12 team league).

The key would be staying out of the "mid-major" arena. That tag makes it hard to get home and home games with other competition.

Bluejay wrote:The key would be staying out of the "mid-major" arena. That tag makes it hard to get home and home games with other competition.

No way this league will be confused with mid-majors.

I am not sure that the mid major label does not get applied for the simple fact there is not football. There are household names of course but what happens when a Butler or Xavier move to a new conference? You can not assume that the win total will be there in a new league.

The whole mid-major thing is dumb IMO. Is Clemson a high major because they play in the ACC and have a solid football program....though, they are historically average or worse in basketbal? What about Northwestern in basketball? Are they high major because they are in the Big 10? The label is stupid.

The mid-major label is finicky. People usually aren't clear as to whether a program's status as a mid major or high major is determined by their success, their budget, their conference affiliation, or some combination thereof.

The Big 10 conference is clearly a high major conference, but why? In my opinion, it's because the conference membership regularly receives multiple at-large bids. However, is conference affiliation enough to make Northwestern a high major? Along the same lines, the MVC is a mid-major conference because it sometimes receives multiple at-large bids. Finally, the SWAC is a low-major conference because it never receives multiple at-large bids.

Labeling individual teams is trickier. Is Gonzaga a high major because it is regularly deserving of an at-large bid, or is it a mid-major because of conference affiliation? Are SLU, Saint Joseph's, and Dayton mid-majors because they are sometimes deserving of an at-large bid, but not on a consistent basis, or are they high majors because their conference regularly gets multiple at-large bids? Is Nebraska a high major because it has a large basketball budget and competes in the B1G, or is it a low major because it is a horrible basketball program? The answer varies from person to person; there is no clear consensus.

I think it's all about perception, and conference affiliation is a huge part of that perception. For some teams, the conference is strong enough for all of its members to be considered high-major, despite actual results. For others, the conference is strong, but not strong enough. Northwestern is certainly a higher-major program than Fordham, even though both leagues regularly get multiple at-large bids. Obviously, the B1G is better than the A10.

I think this new conference would absolutely, 100% be a high-major conference. Villanova, Georgetown, Marquette, Xavier, and Butler would all be regular contenders for an at-large bid, and the conference would probably get at least four teams into the tournament. However, will the conference's total strength be enough to strengthen the reputations of the lower-tier schools? I think the strength will be strong enough if the conference regularly has representation in April. If not, it'll be a high-major conference with some mid-major members.

major major major major major major (just in case I didn't say that word enough).

My fellow X fans will all agree that one benefit of the new conference is shedding that dreaded "mid" label for good. I see no reason this is not a top 5 league year in and year out.