Common sense, at last to me , says the top five are:
Big 12
Then decide between ACC, Sec, BiG and Big East.
Adding Arizona gives the Big 12 possibly 4 top ten teams. Maybe 6 top 20!
Colorado and Utah are at least good. And West Virginia and Okie State historically have been much better than this year and I think will be much better next season.
Snd what IF Gonzaga comes for all other sports!
I would put the WCC above the MWC based on having multiple Top 20 teams.
I realize the WCC may have lots of weak teams after that.
As I said, there are always NET outliers.
If the WCC only had ONE NET Top 20 team, then I’d consider them to be an outlier.
But with TWO Top 20 teams to the MWC’s ZERO, it’s tough to make the case that the MWC is better.
Suppose this were football.
Would a conference with NO Top 20 teams be considered better than one with MULTIPLE Top 20 teams?
Probably NOT, regardless of RPI.
As it stands, there are five or six conferences with more NET Top 20 teams than the MWC in basketball.
As such, the MWC cannot be regarded properly as Top Four.
Traditionally I think that’s right. But this season the MWC has a lot of good teams, six ranked from 21 to 38. And SDSU did get to the championship game last year.
SDSU will be a one hit wonder in all likelihood.
And this year……NO MWC team will really shine.
May be. We’ll see. Regardless the MWC is clearly one of the better basketball conferences this year, from top to bottom very likely top five with the Big 12, Big 10, ACC, SEC, and Big East. The PAC 12 will get three in the NCAA Tournament because of Oregon’s upset win of the conference tournament. But the PAC was down this year.
MWC gets six bids, tied for the second most with the Big 10 and ahead of the ACC (5), PAC 12 (4), and Big East (3).
Two of them were play ins given to the last four in.
Anyway, I don’t see them with any high seeds. The highest is #5.
I see the Big East with a #1 seed, a #2 seed, and a #3 seed, as well as the overall #1 seed and tourney favorite.
Given that, it’s hard for me to think of the MWC as being better than the BE, despite their having more teams in. The MWC will be lucky to get anyone past the Sweet 16. The BE, by contrast, will be considered a disappointment if they don’t get at least one team to the Final Four. But I guess “March Madness” will be the true test.
As for the PAC…sure. I never suggested that the PAC was better than the MWC. I’ll allow that the MWC is ahead of the PAC. WHO ISN’T??? Zona is the only really strong team, and they’re headed our way next season.
The ACC…again…higher seeds, including a #1, a #2, and a #4. I’m more impressed by that than I am the MWC, but if one of the MWC teams come out of nowhere to make a deep run, I’ll be the first one to come forward and stand corrected.
I mean if they take the best of the G5 West of the Mississippi and AAC takes the best east we will have a full stair step on NCAA
P2
Big XII-ACC
PAC-AAC
CUSA-MAC-SUN Belt
Pacific division:
Oregon State
Washington State
Fresno State
UNLV
San Diego State
Midwest division:
Boise
Colorado State
New Mexico
Rice
Tulane
Would be a solid Pac10 conference and some gravitas with the two privates. Maybe enough to recruit Stanford and Cal to align leaving their geographic isolation with the ACC, and do a 12 team version of the Pac10. UNLV would be sent west with their addition
If Stanford and Cal leave for that, then it’ll be proof that they are no longer interested in being in a “power” conference.
I cant exactly say what that new PAC 12 would be, but it seems a respectable new G5 conference…one that could compete for that 1 playoff slot every year. Given how old PAC despised Boise as academic trash, it will be interesting to see if they take them, or opt for candidates like Utah State or San Jose.
Yeah I don’t understand why all these journalists keep talking about teams just getting up and forming a conference as a response to what happened to the PAC12
It’s pretty clear that the networks aren’t looking to do anything but consolidate as much as possible.
The Big 12 is the only conference that makes even remote sense as a bridge between the SEC/B1G and everyone else
You have to have 12 schools for divisions, unless you get a waiver. Maybe add Utah St. and Nevada-Reno. Rice? Tulane? Maybe AFA and New Mexico
Most reputable national journalists do not talk about that unless it’s getting ready to happen. Anyone who is posting tweets or articles about it now, are looking for clicks and views since their apps are monetized.
Realignment/conference expansion is a hot topic so a lot of them make up stuff about it to get your clicks.
Swaim blocked me because I posted this image on one of his realignment Twitter post.
Tulsa and another Texas school?
I know it’ll be a wild scenario seeing Stanford and Cal leave their comfortable nest in the ACC.
But something about being in a ‘Pac10 conference’… or even ‘Pac12’… I think with time both teams could envision themselves being eventual pillars in that hypothetical conference.
Would just take some getting used to by their admins have the ‘PAC’ branding on their athletic teams. Stranger things have happened
Not seeing Cal and Stanford joining.
Wazzu and OSU probably will “reverse merge” with all or part of the MWC; they might even adopt the PAC name and logos.
But it won’t be a power conference, nor will anyone leave any of the P4 to join it.
It would take a total ACC collapse to make that a possibility.
Pac2 taking only some MWC schools is just not feasible with penalties laid out in scheduling agreement they signed. Sliding scale of about $10m per school plus school has exit fee, another $14m.
Or you convince 9 of 12 MWC to disband conference for no fee? Might as well just merge and keep PAC name.
Pac2 are holding out for other options but MWC is basically all or nothing looking at $s.
As I said, it would be a sort of “reverse” merger by which the MWC invited the PAC-2 to join them, thus no exit fees, and the PAC-2 would then allow the MWC to use the PAC name and logos, which they now own and could allow their new conference to use, thanks to having won that lawsuit.
Under that scenario, the PAC would again exist, but as a non-power conference; basically a MWC on steroids.
Could Stanford and Cal be persuaded to rejoin it? Well, only if the ACC completely collapses, which doesn’t seem likely.
I agree with whoever it was that said that Stanford and Cal are probably not going to like the idea of being in a conference with Boise, Fresno, Wyoming, etc.
Not enough academic snob appeal.
This is unfair.
I am sure he only posts stuff made up by other people.
©Copyright 2017 Coogfans.com
