Thanks Fjhryn and Duq 81 for your
posts and I didn't mean to use mid major in a derogatory fashion to our conference at all Duq81 but the  NCAA tournament and FBS playoffs  selection committees seem to look at both as Power Conferences and then the rest of the conference's and teams. That was my inarticulatly expressed point and it seems that the rules are always changing to benefit the Power conferences .Recently the non power 5s are doing some creative things schedule wise to fight back ! Technically I don't believe that the NCAa uses mid major or high major in basketball and it is commentators and websites etc that use them interchangeably

Mid-majors

http://www.collegeinsider.com/mens-mid-major-top-25.php

fjhryn wrote:

interesting. Then what category do the non-Power 5 conferences that are not included in the "mid-Major" rankings fall into? I can't recall ever seeing an article referring to the A-10 as anything other than a "mid-Major" conference. 

There was a site that categorized us as ":high major". The BE is put with the P5 for now. These are the leagues that win National Championships. The high majors are the leagues that put teams into the Top 25, and get multiple bids on a regular basis, as well as making deep runs into the tournament. These would be; the A10, AAC, MWC, and MVC. At one time, CUSA, was a part of this group, and the Horizon, and CAA were on the cusp. As the P5 leagues expanded, and stripped away the best teams from these leagues, they in turn, stripped away the best programs from the leagues that occasionally made some noise. As a result, the 4 "high major" leagues now pretty much get all of the at large bids that don't go to the 6 big conferences, leaving pretty much nothing for the true mid majors. Even St. Mary's couldn't get a bid last year. It stinks, but it's in our best interest to keep that gap in place between these 4 leagues, and the rest. In what was clearly a down year for the A10, we still got 3 teams in.
 

Fjhryn duq 81 yakrbc  and everyone.. thanks again for interesting discussion about the labels. I  get Duq 81s point but again the NCAA doesn't recognize the 2 labels  at least officially as I can see.Also  I'm not sure  that what Marshall thinks of the A10 or Duquesne matters  nearly as much as what NCAA  thinks and of course in basketball the selection committee.  I  don't totally understand the selection criteria but the whole "quadrant " concept appears to  have been put in to give more weight to Power 5s conference wins for example. Maybe 3 bids which has  been the A10 norm recently  deserves some label as Duq81 suggests but in the end it is increasingly important to recognize that the Power 5 conferences are constantly changing rules to benefit their conferences , naturally. My original point  was that A10 should look at scheduling  to enhance and insure NCAA participation( and of course my personal pipedream that an A10 football  league  be formed  and I used mid major probably out of habit  and my Duquesne
Football passion haha).I am  glad we collectively  did some research indicating different websites seem to use mid major and high major for A10. I certainly agree with Duq81 and 3bids need to be a minimum  and recognize Duq81 high major distinction point in that regard. Thanks again everyone