Today, for the first time, I ask the NCAA selection committee to trust me. You will be rewarded for your faith, just like last year and in many years past.

Popular opinion, based on a lousy November, is that CAA is down this year. There’s no way the CAA is worthy of a second bid, right? Today I’m going to show you that the opinion is only partially right.

You see, our Association is certainly having its challenges, but I’m telling you right now that the top four teams in the CAA are not actually having a down year. Not anymore. In fact, they’ve all kicked it into high gear as we cross into February, The Proving Month.

If you want closing speed, I submit four teams already moving fast, and getting faster:

• Drexel has won 10 straight and is 16-1 in its last 17 games. Only seven of the vanquished 16 teams have come within 12 points of the Dragons, and four within seven points.
• VCU, a team of which you’re probably familiar, has won eight in a row (since losing to Drexel) and is 16-2 in its last 18 games. Ten times Rams’ foes haven’t reached 60 points, and six times they haven’t even hit 50 points.
• Mason is 11-2 in its last 13 games–one of those losses is Drexel. They are the deepest team in the league.
• Old Dominion is 7-1 in its last eight games and 8-2 in its last 10 games. Their only losses are to VCU and Mason. Two of Blaine Taylor’s best players became eligible in December and his very best player is finally healthy.

Let me put it this way: these top four teams are 36-4 versus the rest of conference.

So yes, the CAA as a whole is a victim of youth, sketchy scheduling, and transition in the year after three teams made The Dance and two of those teams won games. But the bellwether programs are playing at a Sweet 16 level and you should take note.

Now let me add a little fodder perhaps nobody has noticed: this regular season is beginning to structure very much like the 2005-06 season. You remember that one, right? You trusted the CAA to include George Mason, and look how that paid off. And while we’ve almost forgiven you for not including Hofstra, remember they played ODU in the NIT quarterfinals. We’ve been playing damn good basketball for years.

Here’s the other side. In 2007 you put your faith in Stanford, a fourth-place PAC 10 team who was 18-12 and had lost four of its last five games. You ignored a stumbling finish and bought into the brand. The Cardinal “rewarded” you by falling behind Louisville by more than 20 points inside of 10 minutes of their first round game, by more than 30 points for much of the second half, and fell by a lopsided margin. You know now what we knew then–you should’ve taken Drexel.

Remember, too, that VCU backed up that faith in 2007 by beating Duke. Old Dominion plunked Notre Dame in 2010. Last year must still be fresh in your minds. I think we’ve proven the point that the CAAs best can beat anybody, anytime.

So here’s what I mean by similar structure. In 2005-06 the conference had three distinct tiers. There were four very good teams (final conference victories 15, 15, 14, 13). There were four good-to-middling teams (final conference victories 12, 11, 8, 8). There were four terrible teams (final conference victories 4, 3, 3, 2).

This year the top four have separated themselves in a manner very similar to 2005-06. Each has 10 victories, and the fifth place team is three games back with a 7-5 record. In fact, both Georgia State and Northeastern have seven wins, Delaware is 6-6, and we’ll add the 4-8 Dubmen to get us the middle tier of four teams. The bottom four teams are JMU at 3-9, Hofstra/W&M at 2-10, and Towson at 1-11.

See where I’m going?

It gets more intriguing. At a similar point in 2006 (2/6) we didn’t even have this much separation at the top. Mason (11-2) and UNCW (10-3)–who would eventually tie for the regular season crown at 15-3–led the way. Hofstra followed at 9-3 and then came three teams (ODU, VCU, NU) at 9-4.

Only Wilmington would finish the regular season without losing again. We could be talking an even greater level of dominance this year from the top tier.

Now, I’m certainly not comparing 2006 to this season in a phony attempt to make it look apples-and-apples. I know the CAA RPI numbers that year were astronomically better. I know this year lacks a signature win. My point is that the top tier of the CAA–in any season–is quality basketball that can compete with anyone, and it has very little to do with pre-Thanksgiving action.

My mitigating evidence is that the early season was terrible, for sure, but there was a reason.

Mason was dealing with a whole new coach and system, and lost core elements of its team. VCU lost four seniors from its Final Four team. ODU lost just as many of its weapons, as well as Frank Hassell, who was as valuable for what he provided more than his raw numbers. And Drexel was banged up–no Chris Fouch–and nobody knew who Damion Lee was.

The poor RPI showing is manifested in bad losses–due in part to newness and injury–and not having heavy duty schedules. But each team has improved over two months and flourished of late. Isn’t that exactly the kind of team you want?

Here’s the other side of that. Weren’t Connecticut and Pitt preseason top 10 teams? All I ask is that if you’re going to hold November against the CAA, please hold January against those teams.

Let’s face it–a big part of your business is storytelling anyway, right? Isn’t the CAA a way more exciting story than some humdrum, <insert name here> fifth-place Big Ten team? You do a good job selecting teams, but somebody is going to be unhappy they were left out. They always are. Heck, Seth Greenberg already has his speechwriters scribbling away.

I may be an idiot for several things, like the CAA Hoopsapalooza. But trust me on this one.

The Feed is a curated aggregation of CAA-related news and blogs. Our goal is to highlight the great articles being written and direct traffic back to the original sources, introducing fans to new places to find news and opinion about the teams and league they follow fervently.