In previous seasons, Stats Corner has compared Mountain West Conference (MWC) basketball to the AAC, Atlantic 10, Missouri Valley, PAC-12, and WCC. While a Power Four bias exists in both basketball and football, the MWC has its sights set on challenging the Big East for the title of the nation’s fifth-best conference. This week Stats Corner, we are diving into a comparative analysis of the Mountain West against the Atlantic 10, WCC, and AAC to determine which conference stands above the rest.

All rankings are based on the NCAA NET System as of January 27th. (Here is a refresher on the NET system.)

The conferences have been divided into tiers based on their size:

• MWC and WCC: 4-4-4 split

• Atlantic 10: 4-5-5 split

MWC Average Ranking: 117.5 Non-conference record 75-45, 62.5%

A10 Average Ranking: 122.5 Non-conference record 108-59 64.7%

WCC Average Ranking: 135.8 Non-conference record 84-57 59.8%

AAC Average Ranking: 162.5 Non-conference record 80-70 53.3%

I still maintained that when BYU departed the WCC, the MWC should have extended invitations to Gonzaga and Saint Mary’s to join the conference, with either San Francisco or New Mexico State to balance the numbers. The Gonzaga opportunity has passed, but the others are still available and the consequences for not acting are evident.

The WCC is a weaker league than in years past and will continue to face potential poaching. Meanwhile, the MWC’s average ranking is still in the triple digits after hovering in the 80s and 90s just a couple seasons ago. The American has also seen significant declines from previous years.

These averages directly impact NCAA Tournament bids. The A10 and AAC appear poised for single-bid seasons, while the WCC and MWC could see two or possibly three bids, essential for conferences without legitimate national championship contenders (though San Diego State has made things interesting in recent years).

MWC 42.8: #26 Utah State, #39 New Mexico, #47 San Diego State, #59 Boise State

WCC 44.5: #4 Gonzaga, #29 St. Mary’s, #45 Santa Clara, #100 San Francisco

A10 51.0: #18 St. Louis, #49 VCU, #67 George Mason, #70 George Washington

AAC 73.5: #48 Tulsa, #63 South Florida, #88 Wichita State, #95 Florida Atlantic

The MWC has overtaken the WCC as the highest-ranked conference in this tier, largely because Gonzaga aside, the WCC’s fourth-best team sits in triple digits. However, both conferences are looking at just two realistic NCAA bids, as usual for WCC and down from previous MWC. The Atlantic 10 has Saint Louis as their flagship program, with VCU also in the top 50 despite operating in the league’s larger 14-team format. The American has fallen considerably, with only one school positioned for an at-large bid scenario.

MWC 83.3: #64 Nevada, #74 Grand Canyon, #94 Colorado State, #101 Wyoming

A10 121.0: #93 Dayton, #112 Rhode Island, #124 Davidson, #128 Richmon, #148 Duquesne

WCC 137.0: #109 Pacific, #122 Seattle U, #151 Washington State, #166 LMU

AAC 159.4: #121 UAB, #125 Memphis, #154 Tulane, #165 Charlotte, #167 North Texas
To achieve high NET rankings, quality competition is essential. While these teams may not grab national attention or secure at-large bids, they heavily influence top-tier NET rankings by providing Quad 1 or Quad 2 opportunities.

This is a massive strength for the MWC, their entire second tier delivers Quad 1 or Quad 2 wins. This is especially crucial because Quad 1/2 losses don’t cause massive ranking drops, while Quad 1/2 wins provide significant boosts. With teams ranked this highly, even opening-round conference tournament matchups could be Quad 2 battles—which is exactly what at-large hopefuls need to impress the selection committee.

Conversely, this area represents a major weakness for the A10, WCC, and AAC. The considerable drop-off in quality means a bad loss or an opening-round tournament game could become a Quad 3 or Quad 4 matchup—devastating if lost, and minimally helpful if won.

A10 221.2: #159 St. Bonaventure, #170 St. Joseph’s, #226 La Salle, #228 Fordham, #323 Loyola Chicago

WCC 225.8: #209 San Diego, #210 Portland, #211 Oregon State, #273 Pepperdine

MWC 226.533: #149 Fresno State, #269 San Jose State, #345 Air Force

AAC 271.8: #204 Tulane, #249 Rice, #284 East Carolina, #350 UTSA

These are the teams that need to elevate their performance. Every conference will have teams at the bottom, but they don’t need to drag down everyone else with poor NET rankings. A victory over Air Force or UTSA (ranked #345 and #350 out of 365) won’t move the needle for top-tier MWC or AAC teams.

The A10 and WCC benefit from not having such severe drop-offs among their lower-tier teams. In previous years, the MWC would have two or three schools in the 200s and a couple in the 300s. This year, only Fresno State sits in the 200s, while Air Force is ranked in the 300s. For a conference to secure multiple NCAA bids, it cannot afford a bottom tier averaging in the low 200s, as this drags down the entire conference’s NET profile. Under the NET system, school rankings are interconnected, a strong conference cannot sustain too many poorly-ranked programs.

The MWC leads all examined conferences with an average NET ranking of 117.5, outperforming the A10 (122.5), WCC (135.8), and AAC (162.5). While the A10 boasts the strongest non-conference winning percentage at 64.7%, the MWC’s balanced performance across two of the three tiers 42.8 (first) and 83.3 (second), sets it apart from competitors.

Based on NET rankings, tier-by-tier performance, and NCAA Tournament bid projections, the Mountain West Conference emerges as the strongest basketball league among those examined. The MWC positions itself for two to three NCAA bids, double the projected single-bid scenarios facing the A10 and AAC.

However, the path forward requires addressing structural vulnerabilities. The missed opportunity to add Gonzaga and Saint Mary’s during the WCC’s instability in 2023 remains a strategic error. With the reconfigured PAC 8 potentially looking to become the PAC 12 again, that would mean targeting WCC and MWC programs, therefore the MWC must act decisively to either poach top programs or strengthen its own bottom tier to prevent conference erosion.

The MWC sits just behind the Big East, with the primary difference being bottom-tier quality: Georgetown (#111) and Marquette (#130) versus San Jose State and Air Force. If the Mountain West can elevate its third-tier programs and avoid the talent drain affecting the AAC, it has legitimate potential to claim fifth-best conference status nationally.

Mountain West basketball enters the 2025-26 season in a unique position: positioned to challenge the Big East as the nation’s fifth-best conference, yet vulnerable to the same expansion poaching that devastated the American Athletic Conference. There’s no doubt the American Athletic Conference is struggling, having lost basketball powers Cincinnati, Houston, and UConn. The WCC and MWC could face similar situations with potential future departures to whatever remains of the PAC-12/PAC-8.