Read the opposing arguments from Bleacher Fan and Babe Ruthless.
You know a term is beginning to hit rarified air in the social Web-stratosphere when it gets its own Wikipedia page. Such is the case with “mid-major.” These supposed less-than-stellar conferences often boast some of the best teams and most exciting, memorable moments of the NCAA tournament.
We all remember in 2006 when George Mason made a deep run into the NCAA tournament – even beating some tournament favorites along the way, like the team’s first surprising upset over a talented and tough Michigan State squad. It is fair to write that the excellent mid-major teams are the exception, not the rule, since they have never won a NCAA tournament championship. But – when will a mid-major rewrite the rule?
There are some excellent mid-major conferences this season featuring better than average teams. The Atlantic-10 alone features five 20-win teams, at least three of which belong in the NCAA tournament: Temple, Richmond, and Xavier. The Mid-American Conference has a pair of 20 wins teams, too, in rivals Akron and Kent State. In short, the crop of mid-major teams looks as strong this season as it ever has. And, it appears as though the team that wins the conference tournament may not necessarily be the best team in conference (THAT, folks, is an entirely different debate between the value of the regular season champion versus the tournament champion).
The fact is, though, the George Mason example is an easy one to give. But, that team did not win in the Final Four, and no mid-major team has ever made the final game or won an NCAA tournament championship. Therefore, the question begs – Does an excellent mid-major team deserve to get in to the NCAA tournament over a mediocre major conference team?
Bleacher Fan will argue that mid-major teams, though they may not be from the most glamorous of conferences, deserve to get in to the NCAA tournament over a mediocre team from a major conference. Babe Ruthless will argue that major conference schools have major conference players… those teams are all excellent and deserve the shot at the extra spot in the tournament.
For the purposes of this debate we shall run the following scenario: The last spot in the NCAA tournament comes down to a second-place mid-major team and an eighth place major conference team. Who should get it?
My preconceived notions are low, but my expectations are high. Use plenty of examples and make the case. Are the underdogs really wolves in sheep clothing? Are mediocre teams from dominant conferences really just a mirage? Let’s tip off the debate.
