It appears most of you don't know what "mid-major" is

Posted on: February 2, 2020 at 09:16:32 CT

The actual intended meaning of "mid-major" is not what you're using it as. It's not supposed to be a measuring stick of how good or bad a program is.

Rather, "mid-major" applies to conferences that do not play football at the bowl subdivision level. At least, that's the original definition. All of Div. 1 is "major" and Div. 2 and below is "minor." Further subdivision of "major" is "high-major," "mid-major," and "low-major." All of those apply to the level of conference. If a school is in a high-major conference, it is a "high-major program," even if it is almost always mediocre or worse (bad).

It is possible for a mid-major program to be better than a high-major program. Gonzaga is a mid-major program, by the original definition. It's only when people misconstrue the meaning, to make it a "slap" rather than the original intent of what level of conference affiliation it has, that people begin to say, "Gonzaga isn't mid-major."

Missouri, as much as the program has been struggling to restore itself to its former glory, such as it was, is not "mid-major." Period. Stop using the term as a description of the program's level of quality in relation to other programs!