Posted by kmasonbx1 on 3/11/2014 12:44:00 PM (view original):
Posted by tannermcc on 3/11/2014 12:34:00 PM (view original):Exactly this.
The CUSA in Rupp is just an example of if coaches WANTED to make mid majors viable they could.
The issue is no coaches want to do it in most worlds. It's easier to goto preestablished conferences.
CURRENT Prestige of the CUSA Schools in Rupp
Marshall A+ (NT game last season)
East Carolina B+
Central Florida B+
S. Mississippi B
The current state of WIS at D1 is a large hold over from the previous way prestige worked where it was BCS conference or bust. Now it's different. The problem is no coach wants to leave an established program to join a bad team/conference.
I'd be willing to bet if they started a new world D1 would look ALOT different.
There's a stigma that you can't win at a mid major, that just isn't based on reality.
no, not exactly this. tanner, you say you bet if they started a new world, d1 would look a lot different. for starters, they did - twice. knight and phelan both came out AFTER the change to the way prestige worked. not surprisingly both look just like the old d1 worlds. so that comment is not even close.
to kmason's point, i have to agree with mygeneration. the fact that 12 of the best coaches in the game, including several of the "active top 10" if you will, can work together as a team to make a mid major work, doesn't really say anything about the experience of the users in the normal spectrum. people mention lostmyth but that was not even new engine era. the complaint is the new engine era has worked out mid majors, primarily through the mechanism of changing d1 recruit generation. on this front, i wholly agree. i said the same thing when girt and his band of merrymen (to borrow the phrase) set out to turn CUSA into a power house - if they succeed, it means nothing (in the context of this argument), that cast of coaches is more or less the greatest ever assembled in one conference. if they failed, it would mean a lot - it would mean it was as close to literally impossible as you could get. CUSA is one of the few high prestige mid major conferences as well, their C baseline is not really that far off the B- that has proven time and time again to be more than enough for top tier coaches - plus, geographically, it is ideal.
this is not coincidence, girt architected that conference specifically, to basically give them the best shot you could possibly have of making it work. the disadvantages of C baseline compared to a lower end big 6 conference is simply not enough to outweigh the advantages of having those coaches and the geographical distance - i don't really think anyone should be surprised by their result. of course, its still very impressive, girt's title is still very impressive, im not trying to suggest the opposite, not in the slightest. but when it takes girt (likely the single greatest coach of the past few years) and that cast of coaches to achieve the first and only mid major title in d1 since the new engine came out, this singular example cannot be used to discount the argument in general.
the reality for most coaches is that mid major success is prohibitively difficult - making the choice to stay at a mid major rather than move to the big 6, competitively unfeasible. its one thing to do it with a disadvantage, its another when the disadvantage is so large. when you look across the world, the number of coaches who can maintain top tier d1 programs with a/a+ prestige, with somewhat regular shots at the title, its quite large. of all these coaches, try to imagine how many of those same coaches could compete on that same level in a relatively normal mid major situation - its a tiny %. i believe a coach like girt could go do it on his own, but its still extremely difficult and minimally vastly more difficult than competing at that high level at a BCS school. i just don't think its genuine to point to CUSA Rupp and go "see, its possible!". while true, it goes against the spirit of the argument, nobody is saying its "completely and totally impossible to win" - or at least not the reasonable majority. the argument is the gap is simply too large, and that really comes down to opinion - but the evidence does suggest the gap really is quite large.