Hmmm, ESPN -- how did you pick your list?

[WSUwatcher]

http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/story/_/id/7211292/what-expect-mid-majors-2011-12-college-basketball

This is disappointing -- and should be a wakeup call for Doug Elgin and the MVC (if one is still needed). In their piece on what to expect from the "mid-majors," ESPN offers predictions on a list of "mid-major" conferences as long as your arm, including the Valley and the Colonial -- but the article doesn't include the A-10, Conference USA, or the Mountain West. Have those three graduated to a higher status?

More to the point, if those three have moved up, what happened to the image of the MVC that had four teams in the tournament and two in the round of 16 just five years ago? (By the way, the CAA has an even stronger gripe, in my view.) It's one thing not to be one of the "power six," which except for the desperate and collapsing Big East are so designated because of football more than anything else. But it's pretty bad to be left behind, even in the eyes of a couple of East Coast provincials, by a league (the C-USA, with Memphis) that often goes about one deep.

[Aargh]

The SWAC is now a "mid major". Evidently the classification "low major" has been eliminated by these guys.

[_kai_]

1.) Just because one writer writes a piece that is published on ESPN doesn't mean he now speaks for the entire staff of writers at ESPN.

2.) That guy is not a staff writer from my understanding. He is the Minnesota beat writer. It would be as if Suellentrop wrote that piece, and ESPN picked it up.

3.) It's a collaboration with Andy Katz, we don't really know how much Andy wrote or how much Myron wrote. In my findings, Andy is very pro MVC, and pro Wichita State.

[ShockTalk]

http://espn.go.com/mens-college-bask...ege-basketball

This is disappointing -- and should be a wakeup call for Doug Elgin and the MVC (if one is still needed). In their piece on what to expect from the "mid-majors," ESPN offers predictions on a list of "mid-major" conferences as long as your arm, including the Valley and the Colonial -- but the article doesn't include the A-10, Conference USA, or the Mountain West. Have those three graduated to a higher status?

More to the point, if those three have moved up, what happened to the image of the MVC that had four teams in the tournament and two in the round of 16 just five years ago? (By the way, the CAA has an even stronger gripe, in my view.) It's one thing not to be one of the "power six," which except for the desperate and collapsing Big East are so designated because of football more than anything else. But it's pretty bad to be left behind, even in the eyes of a couple of East Coast provincials, by a league (the C-USA, with Memphis) that often goes about one deep.

ESPN took it upon themselves to elevate C-USA, Atl-Whatever, and MWC last year as being "quasi majors". The MWC somewhat earn it with their conference RPI and # of schools getting into the Dance recently. The Atlantic-10 always has the advantage of playing a lot of BCS (Big East in particular) teams and they are located in the East after all. Don't have a clue as to why C-USA is there.

The Valley picked a bad time for a lot of their schools to dummy down their schedules and not win more of the big games they needed to. Had Elgin kept, or been able to keep, the initiative that got the Valley multiple bids earlier in the decade, we might have been included or the "quasi major" label wouldn't have happened.

[DUShock]

I am sure glad we don't have that resource sucking drain football... <sarcasm>

[MadDog]

I suspect this Quasi-major thing may have something to do with the size of your budget. The "quasi major" conferences have larger budgets than the mid-majors. I think
wSU and Creighton might fall in the quasi category, but i would guess the rest of the MVC would not. i doubt the this has anything to do with performance on the court.

[The Mad Hatter]

I am sure glad we don't have that resource sucking drain football... <sarcasm>

I am sure glad that WSU doesn't make budgetary decisions based off of categories made up by an ESPN.com writer... <no sarcasm>

[DUShock]

My commentary is based upon the fact that without football WSU is stepping to the plate with two strikes before a pitch is thrown in the at bat. To think that we are at anything other than a disadvantaged position compared to other univerisities our size is the proverbial head in the sand.

[Aargh]

My commentary is based upon the fact that without football WSU is stepping to the plate with two strikes before a pitch is thrown in the at bat. To think that we are at anything other than a disadvantaged position compared to other univerisities our size is the proverbial head in the sand.

I agree that without FB WSU is at a disadvantage in a lot of sports journalism. I'd put WSU at 1 strike - not 2. I'd put UNI, MSU, and the rest of the Valley with football programs at 2 strikes. Those schools get no respect for the FB programs they have and have limited ability to fund basketball because of the drain that FB puts on their athletic department budgets.

[WSUwatcher]

Good point, Aargh. In case you haven't noticed, DU, there are also some schools in the Big W/East, or whatever the heck they plan to call that silly thing once they finish their desperate attempt to save a BCS qualification, that don't play football either.

I'm not a huge fan of Mark Turgeon's analysis of -- and reaction to -- WSU's "level," but he did accurately once note that WSU is a high-major basketball program in a mid-major conference. The problem isn't that WSU doesn't continue to waste money on an artistically and financially unsuccessful football program; it's the company they keep, which includes schools who do. UNI actually has a very strong FCS football program, an artistic success -- and it's done them so much good that there's been talk in Iowa that they might have to abandon athletics altogether for financial reasons.

[DUShock]

My commentary is based upon the fact that without football WSU is stepping to the plate with two strikes before a pitch is thrown in the at bat. To think that we are at anything other than a disadvantaged position compared to other univerisities our size is the proverbial head in the sand.

I should have been clearer in my two strike analogy and I do agree with your FCS assertion but did not think of it at the time of my original post. Strike 1) the perception of the average sports fan as being a second rate university and program sports without football at any level. Strike 2) With the chaos of conference realignment it will take the stars aligning just right for our Shocks to not end up in a low major conference. Having no program is arguably better than having a poor FCS or doormat D-I football team.
Go Shocks!!!!