I just cant help it.....

[ISASO]

Are Nebraska, Colorado, Northwestern and South Carolina "good programs" or are they mid-majors?

[shockfan89_]

Are Nebraska, Northwestern and South Carolina "good programs" or are they mid-majors?

My definition would be mid-majors in basketball. They were at one time all strong football schools. Like I said, it depends on what your definition of mid-major is. It has been used in many different ways. I never said WSU is a mid-major school. I said we can't really argue the label in basketball. It fits right now...

[SB Shock]

WSU USED to be a good basketball program but it isn't now and wasn't under MT!!!!!

I believe this statement will not hold up to any scrutiny.

The statement about "Mid-Majors" just shows your ignorance of what Mid-Major even stands for.

So you think this was a good basketball program under MT?

Yes, the program was good under MT.

1. You don't have 3-20 wins season in a row if you have a bad program.

2. You don't make it to the NCAA and get to a sweet 16 if your program is bad.

3. You don't put together 6 winning season in row with a bad program.

Everyone has their own take on what defines a mid-major.

There is only one definition of what a mid-major is. What your doing is mis-applying the definition.

Mid-major is a term mainly used in American college basketball and college football, to describe schools not affiliated with a conference whose football teams possess automatic bids to the Bowl Championship Series (BCS).

Therefore by definition of course WSU is always going to be mid-major unless they change their conference affiliation.

[shockfan89_]

I never said WSU was a bad program, but I don't think what MT accomplished is considered a good program. I said it was the START of a good program. Had we built on the success of his good years I would answer differently.

Sorry if I didn't know there was ONE definition of the term mid-major. If everyone uses that term, then you are right, we will always be a mid-major and nobody can ever change that. I doubt most people think of that definition when they hear the term.

[SB Shock]

I never said WSU was a bad program

Your quote was:

WSU USED to be a good basketball program but it isn't now and wasn't under MT

If your not good, then your bad. Sorry, but words have meaning. This is a message board, I only read what your write, not read your mind.

Sorry if I didn't know there was ONE definition of the term mid-major. If everyone uses that term, then you are right, we will always be a mid-major and nobody can ever change that. I doubt most people think of that definition when they hear the term.

Have you taken a poll to see what most people think? Again words have meaning. MVC is mid-major, always will be. But just because they are doesn't mean they can't compete on the national level.

[shockfan89_]

SB - Not trying to argue with you. My definition of a good program is USC Football, KU basketball, WSU baseball. A program that has proven year in and year out that they will compete and be successful. That doesn't mean everyone else is bad. WSU had a couple good basketball teams under MT. That doesn't mean WSU is a good basketball program like KU is a good basketball program.

No I haven't taken a poll, but you must admit people argue over the term "mid-major" ALL THE TIME. If the definition, or the label, was so well accepted like you are suggesting, then there would be no argument and nobody would be offended by calling WSU a mid-major.

[SB Shock]

SB - Not trying to argue with you. My definition of a good program is USC Football, KU basketball, WSU baseball.

Your examples here are beyond "good".

A program that has proven year in and year out that they will compete and be successful. That doesn't mean everyone else is bad. WSU had a couple good basketball teams under MT.

But that's not what you said. I don't disagree.

That doesn't mean WSU is a good basketball program like KU is a good basketball program.

Again you might as well throw in Duke and North Carolina. If that's your standard for being a good program, then there are not many good program out of the 300 Div I programs.

No I haven't taken a poll, but you must admit people argue over the term "mid-major" ALL THE TIME. If the definition, or the label, was so well accepted like you are suggesting, then there would be no argument and nobody would be offended by calling WSU a mid-major.

The only arguments is when people like you use the term wrong.

[shockfan89_]

SB - I didn't make up the term mid-major and I didn't even start using it in this thread. I responded to a post in which it was already used. If you are going to nit-pick and be an a$$hole then I don't really care. If you want to argue that MT's limited success at WSU makes WSU a good basketball program than I will argue that with you.

You are right, I should have more clearly defined what I meant by using the term good program, but I think most people could read the entire post and use some intelligence to determine what my point was. If you need me to break it down for you because you are not mentally capable of following along then I will be happy to do that..

[Downtown Shocker Brown]

I think everyone needs a little captain now and then to help calm down and realize the best policy is to agree to disagree...

Toast: Sugar in a bowl, coffee in a cup, poke her in the ####, don't knock her up!!

Cheers!

[Hotel Paper]

I think everyone needs a little captain now and then to help calm down and realize the best policy is to agree to disagree...

Toast: Sugar in a bowl, coffee in a cup, poke her in the ####, don't knock her up!!

Cheers!

best toast in existence

[SB Shock]

If you want to argue that MT's limited success at WSU makes WSU a good basketball program than I will argue that with you.

Don't put words in my mouth. MT has some good years and had a good program under his tenure. WSU is not a good program right now.

You are right, I should have more clearly defined what I meant by using the term good program,

Thank you.

[ShockBand]

First off, guys, please temper the language. The disagreeing and debating is fine so long as it doesn't become a personal mudslinging match.

My two cents: until we are a consistent presence in the NCAA, winning at least one game most of the time when we get there, with respectable seedings, we will be considered "MM" by many, despite the other positive factors we DO have, like fan and financial support, good facilities, etc.

Coach Turgeon got the program off the doormat, time will tell whether or not HCGM can carry us to the proverbial promised land. I sincerely think he can, but we are realistically a couple years away from seeing the return to the NCAAs.

Over on Whelliston's article referenced above, I love his name for the SEC - Satan's Evil Conference.

[60Shock]

Not sure whose poll it was, but there was a basketball poll published shortly after the ending of the 20th Century listing the top 100 basketball programs in the country.

Wichita State University was not listed in the top 100. Of course, for approximately the first 40 years of the 1900's, I'm not even sure we played much basketball. And what hurt us probably the most was our poor showing during the last 15 years or so years.

During the last 40 + years I have lived in Phoenix, San Antonio, Indianapolis, Boston, KC, D.C., and Daytona Beach (no wise cracks please about not being able to hold a job). Over the years and especially in sports bars and elsewhere when we were making our run to the Sweet 16 run I would get asked, "Gee, I knew you had some great teams back in the 70's and 80's, but I thought you had dropped both your football and BB years ago."

So draw your own conclusions where our basketball program stacks up, over an extended period of time, in the eyes of the rest of the nation outside of Wichita and the MVC.

I take offense at the M-M label too. But until WSU and the MVC can consistently sustain successful programs for an extended number of years, we are going to be identified as such. And, unfortunately labels and classifications are most difficult to erase.

[shockfan89]

Not sure whose poll it was, but there was a basketball poll published shortly after the ending of the 20th Century listing the top 100 basketball programs in the country.

Wichita State University was not listed in the top 100. Of course, for approximately the first 40 years of the 1900's, I'm not even sure we played much basketball. And what hurt us probably the most was our poor showing during the last 15 years or so years.

During the last 40 + years I have lived in Phoenix, San Antonio, Indianapolis, Boston, KC, D.C., and Daytona Beach (no wise cracks please about not being able to hold a job). Over the years and especially in sports bars and elsewhere when we were making our run to the Sweet 16 run I would get asked, "Gee, I knew you had some great teams back in the 70's and 80's, but I thought you had dropped both your football and BB years ago."

So draw your own conclusions where our basketball program stacks up, over an extended period of time, in the eyes of the rest of the nation outside of Wichita and the MVC.

I take offense at the M-M label too. But until WSU and the MVC can consistently sustain successful programs for an extended number of years, we are going to be identified as such. And, unfortunately labels and classifications are most difficult to erase.

Thank you!

[Snapshot9]

The problem comes from the choice of words used to indicate a category of schools not associated with the BCS. People has assigned different meanings to the term because of the term, 'mid' which indicates that those are mid range schools related to performance instead of the level of programs.

I agree, it is a bad term, and is really not explanatory for what it relates to, and easily misunderstood, but it is also historicaly ingrained into the sports world.

I thought my prior recommendation of changing it from 'mid-major' to 'midwest major' was a viable option.