MVCfans.com

glm38 wrote:This is really kind of a pointless and idiotic discussion. Regardless of any label the Shockers have been an elite program the last few years. The big questions to me are: can they climb even higher? And/ or sustain their current excellence?

Undoubtedly there is some jealousy among rival MVC fans. That's only natural isn't it. We all want our teams at that level. But personally I love having a team from MY conference playing at an elite level.

Championz wrote:

Valley_Fan wrote:
If the shockers go 15-15, is anyone saying "WSU is not mid-major"? If Northwestern goes 2-28, is anyone calling them a mid-major? Mid-major is tied to conference, not team.

The problem is the term is watered down. In no way should the MVC be compared to the Horizon if you compare money spent, support, etc.

You just contradicted yourself in your own paragraph. You bring up a fictional WSU record of 15-15 and saying if that happened, would they be mid major? And then a few sentences later, the term mid-major is tied to a conference, not team. Well, which is it? 15-15 shouldn't have anything to do with the term if you think it's only tied to a conference. See, you don't even know where you're going. And this was all out of your own keyboard. It goes all back to the point, that anybody can make up any definition they want for the term. There is no clear definition. What we've come to realize is that most Valley fans feel it's defined as a blanketed conference term, which is generalized and basically doesn't make much sense. Most national people believe it's an individual term and consider that if you breathe like a major, walk like a major, talk like a major, then you are a major, no matter who you're walking around with. WSU's success is not mid-major. WSU's finances are not mid-major. WSU's overall support is not mid-major. But because WSU plays in a league with a bunch of mid-majors, it automatically means they're a mid-major? That makes little to no sense, unless you just don't like WSU looking like they're on a different level than your team. Simple as that.

Ali wrote:We have real basketball games starting soon.

Valley_Fan wrote:If you don't get my point, you aren't thinking too hard. It doesn't matter how good or bad WSU plays, they will always be a mid major because of their conference affiliation. You are calling yourself a major today because you are successful. If you are not successful, no one calls you a major. Teams cannot be a major one year and a mid major the next.

Ghost wrote:Mid major is a title that is assigned purely and solely based on conference affiliation.

Ghost wrote:

Valley_Fan wrote:If you don't get my point, you aren't thinking too hard. It doesn't matter how good or bad WSU plays, they will always be a mid major because of their conference affiliation. You are calling yourself a major today because you are successful. If you are not successful, no one calls you a major. Teams cannot be a major one year and a mid major the next.

I agree with this completely!

Being high major or mid major has absolutely nothing to do with success. If it took success to shed the mid major tag, schools like Northwestern and Nebraska would still be called mid majors. However, as we all know, those schools are not called mid majors.

Mid major is a title that is assigned purely and solely based on conference affiliation.

Valley_Fan wrote:

Championz wrote:

Valley_Fan wrote:
If the shockers go 15-15, is anyone saying "WSU is not mid-major"? If Northwestern goes 2-28, is anyone calling them a mid-major? Mid-major is tied to conference, not team.

The problem is the term is watered down. In no way should the MVC be compared to the Horizon if you compare money spent, support, etc.

You just contradicted yourself in your own paragraph. You bring up a fictional WSU record of 15-15 and saying if that happened, would they be mid major? And then a few sentences later, the term mid-major is tied to a conference, not team. Well, which is it? 15-15 shouldn't have anything to do with the term if you think it's only tied to a conference. See, you don't even know where you're going. And this was all out of your own keyboard. It goes all back to the point, that anybody can make up any definition they want for the term. There is no clear definition. What we've come to realize is that most Valley fans feel it's defined as a blanketed conference term, which is generalized and basically doesn't make much sense. Most national people believe it's an individual term and consider that if you breathe like a major, walk like a major, talk like a major, then you are a major, no matter who you're walking around with. WSU's success is not mid-major. WSU's finances are not mid-major. WSU's overall support is not mid-major. But because WSU plays in a league with a bunch of mid-majors, it automatically means they're a mid-major? That makes little to no sense, unless you just don't like WSU looking like they're on a different level than your team. Simple as that.

If you don't get my point, you aren't thinking too hard. It doesn't matter how good or bad WSU plays, they will always be a mid major because of their conference affiliation. You are calling yourself a major today because you are successful. If you are not successful, no one calls you a major. Teams cannot be a major one year and a mid major the next.

You are the best mid major,, and better than 95% of cbb teams. Why don't you own that instead of being insecure? Who cares what people call you if you are beating them when it counts? Winners don't need to beg for attention. You are a winner and begging for attention. It's embarrassing for you.