As March has begun, it is time to make some statements about the mid-major teams on the bubble. Lets face it, the world is broken into the 6 major conferences (ACC, Big 10, Big 12, Big East, Pac 12 and SEC) and the rest. If you aren’t in those 6, there are many names that get thrown around, small conference, mid-major conference, one-bid conference. They are one of the things that make March great – when they pull off one of those double-digit seed upsets that make the world notice them – even if it is for a single weekend.
This is a plea for the selection committee to look deeper into these teams. Because inevitably, a couple of these teams that have dominated all season are going to lose in their conference tournament (and as the name one-bid conference suggests), will likely be sent to the NIT.
There are two conferences in particular that have my eye – the Missouri Valley, where Indiana State (25-5) and Drake (24-6) are two excellent teams with only a few blemishes on the season. And then, there is the Sun Belt where James Madison (28-3) finds themselves one game behind in the standings to Appalachian State (26-5).
Many will say the following: Sure – James Madison beat Michigan State in East Lansing in overtime but would they be 28-3 if they played a major conference schedule – after all, they did get swept by Appalachian State and lost at Southern Miss. Sure- Appalachian State managed to beat Auburn at home in December. But they also lost to teams like Troy and Texas State. Could they have survived a guantlet like the SEC and have that type of record.
The answer is not as clear as it should be. The truth is, they probably would have lost some more games – but how many is hard to determine. But I will throw this out there for the committee to think about.
The Big 12 has an example that might be worth looking at. The Big 12 welcomed new members to the league – two of them of interest for this conversation (Houston and BYU).
Houston was won of those examples last year as they won the American for 4 of its last 5 seasons, and now was finally going to get a chance in the majors. And if you believed the pre-season predictions, CBS had the Cougars only behind Kansas. And lets face it – Kansas has won the Big 12 in something like 14 of the last 15 seasons, so who would blame the experts for sticking with the champions.
As for BYU, they came from the West Coast Conference where they competed against Gonzaga and St. Mary’s. CBS didn’t have as high opinions here – as they predicted BYU would finish 11th in the conference.
With one week in the regular season, if Houston can win one of their last two games (at UCF and home vs Kansas), they will clinch a share of the Big 12 title. At 26-3, they are the #1 team in the polls, and for good reason. No one is questioning whether they deserve a spot in the dance – they are questioning on whether the committee will give them the national #1 seed. We all know this conversation would be much different if they were still in the American.
But how about BYU – they are 21-8 and 9-7 in the conference, and considered a lock to be in the tournament. They are in a tie for 4th place with the Kansas team predicted to win the whole conference and Texas Tech. I guarantee you – if they had gone 11-5 in the West Coast Conference because they lost their games to Gonzaga and St. Mary’s and then stumbled again on the road (lets say like 22-9 San Francisco did this season), they would be barely on the conversation of the bubble – certainly not a lock.
This is the proof that the committee needs to start to take a look at. If a team like James Madison goes 28-3 and beats Michigan State, and a team like Appalachian State goes 26-5 and beats Auburn (and then sweeps James Madison), they are good teams. Why is it that if we believe that they would lose a few more road games if they played in Big 10 or SEC, they should not get the same consideration. We already know both of those teams are 1-0 against those conferences. Why is it hard to believe that a 28-3 James Madison could finish 21-10 in the Big 10 – if they could beat Michigan State on the road, they probably could hold their home court against the likes of Michigan and Penn State. And then, they would have a profile that looks like (or better than) Michigan State (who is considered safely in the tournament). And yet, if Appalachian State beats them again in the conference tournament, they will have to hope that the NIT decides to take them.
There is great basketball being played outside the major 6 conferences. And as Houston and BYU have shown us, sometimes all these “one-bid conference” teams need is simply a chance to play to prove they belong. I would rather see a 30-4 team play in the tournament than an 18-14 team – even if the 30-4 team won those games in the Sun Belt.
I won’t likely get that option – Appalachian State and James Madison can’t both win the Sun Belt. Someone will be on the outside left out of the dance. Unless the committee sees this plea and reconsiders some past beliefs that are maybe not as a true as we think. And if that happens, they should send a thank you card to Houston and BYU for giving a little more proof – the question shouldn’t be would they lose a few more games. The question is would they win enough – and for Houston and BYU, that answer was yes.