Now, I'm not really the hoops guy on this blog. Don't get me wrong-- I love basketball. I'm just more passionate about baseball and football. Jordan's more of the basketball guy. But anyway, I think it's about time someone talked about the state of things in college basketball right now. So even though it's not my area, I'm going to tell you what I think:
1) I got 96 problems...
First, thank you to the song "99 Problems" for becoming an all-purpose, go-to lyric for "clever" titles. Anyway, seriously? Jordan and I spoke the other day about the tournament, and we were wondering at what point you just stop playing the regular season and start in the tournament. I mean, c'mon! Nobody wants this except the NCAA and Vegas, and that's only because they think they can make more money. Here's my question, though: is this the move that finally alienates the fans? And plus, it throws coaching out of wack. I mean, what do you say if a coach takes his team to the tournament year after year after year, and they lose in the "second round," which will now consist of 64 teams? That'll look okay on their coaching record (they'll be 1-1 in the tourney), but that doesn't really mean anything. What I'd like to see is for the NIT to start inviting the top teams for the NCAAs. I would like to see someone try to win both tournaments. Frankly, the NCAAs are a joke. It would be better if the NIT shrunk it back to 16 teams, or 8 teams, and only invited the top teams in the country, so that there couldn't be some ridiculous pretenders winning two games and pushing out good teams. I'm not talking about Northern Iowa or Butler, by the way, but I'll cover that in my next point. I'm talking about teams like George Mason, when they went to the Final Four-- a bad team who snuck by.
2) Duke Winning: Good for College Basketball?
Here's the thing- I grew up hating Duke. Like any good child my age, I knew that I had to pick between liking North Carolina and Duke, and I picked UNC. They had more compelling players. They were more fun to watch. And they looked like they were having fun playing basketball, and not like the Duke kids who looked like they were forced into slave labor or something. When UNC won, they looked happy. When Duke won, they looked relieved. Now, should I love the "team" atmosphere around Duke? Should I like that they work hard? That they're unapologetically consistent? That they don't care what people think about them? Yes, yes, yes, and yes. But you know what? I drew my line in the sand long ago. I couldn't stand the team that was good every year. It's like how I hate the Yankees, the Lakers, the Cowboys, Notre Dame football, Florida State football, and Miami football. Notice the three programs I listed for football, though. Here's the thing: I've lost the hate. Now, they're jokes to me. I've made as many Charlie Weis jokes as anyway, but that's just because Ralph Mangino jokes aren't as funny since no one knows who he is. Plus, now it turns out he chokes people or whatever. Anyway, I think that Duke winning is good, so that I can keep hating them. I like that about college sports. It's fun to have teams you love and teams you hate. Now, admittedly, I was having fun making fun of Duke for their recent choke-jobs in the Sweet Sixteen, but here's the thing: Duke was never a program that I made fun of. That's for programs that aren't the mighty Duke. Duke is just The Enemy. So, am I happy about Duke winning the National Championship game? No. Absolutely not. I wanted to see Butler absolutely stomp them. But, you know what? I'm not as upset about it as I would have been in years past. They're just trying to keep the drama alive in our relationship, and I appreciate it.
3) The Rise of the Mid-Major
Finally, it's here. College basketball has gotten to ignore this for too long. I mean, look at college football. Now, are the higher-ups still in denial? Yes. But they (kind of) give those teams a chance. At least, they keep them competitive until the end, and people are willing to rank mid-majors in the top 10. College hoops, though? They've been living in a dream world in which Gonzaga is the only relevant mid-major. True, Gonzaga has a good program. But here's the thing: is Butler really any better or worse than, say, Purdue? Or South Carolina? Or USC? Or any one of about a thousand schools that seem to make the tournament, beat and overwhelmed opponent, and then lose to a better team? There's no difference. Really, what happened this year is that Butler was a top-5 team in the country (as were Duke, Kansas, Kentucky, and Syracuse). They should have probably garnered a 2 seed-- maybe a 3, if you're skeptical. But they lost a couple of games in their conference, so as a mid-major, that meant they were a nobody, right? Wrong. Wake up, people-- the Horizon League has a lot of good teams and players. This isn't 8 years ago-- you don't need to go undefeated in a mid-major conference to prove you're a good team. Here's the thing about basketball talent: it's spread out all over. There are so many talented players, and too many schools. So, if given the choice between riding the pine for Duke or starting for 4 years and being a god at Butler, what would you do? All I'm saying is, it's no surprise that a lot of really, really talented players are opting for the lesser-named schools. If I knew I were D-1 scholarship level, but I didn't have pro teams already breathing down my neck, I know where I'd go. I'd go where I could have four amazing years of college, and hopefully make a run or two in the tournament. It's an amazing opportunity. Honestly, it's not that hard to imagine the power shift happening in college hoops just like it's happening in college pigskin-- too many good players, not even big-name schools. All of this just means that the "traditional powers" need to start growing eyes in the back of their heads, on the back of their palms, on their ankles, and everywhere else they can, because the mid-majors are absolutely for real. And it's about time.
4) It has to be said
Rarely will you read Jordan or me say anything about women's sports. It's not that we're sexists-- it's just that we haven't grown up following those things, and following them takes a lot more effort than we're willing to put forward. I mean, I don't even follow the NHL, because I didn't grow up in a hockey town. So sue me. I say, it's the fault of the sports media. However, the UConn women's basketball team does merit a lot of mention here, because you'd have to be living under a rock not to know about "the streak." I think it's commendable. If I were coaching them, I think I'd be bored, but that's just me-- and really, that's beside the point. I just want to congratulate the Huskies for their tremendous accomplishment. I'm not going to argue about whether it's good or bad for women's basketball, and I'm not going to critique their run or worry about them winning by "only" six points (ending the double-digit-margin-of-victory streak). I just think it's impressive, and deserves mention in a "State of the Union" sort of column.
1) I got 96 problems...
First, thank you to the song "99 Problems" for becoming an all-purpose, go-to lyric for "clever" titles. Anyway, seriously? Jordan and I spoke the other day about the tournament, and we were wondering at what point you just stop playing the regular season and start in the tournament. I mean, c'mon! Nobody wants this except the NCAA and Vegas, and that's only because they think they can make more money. Here's my question, though: is this the move that finally alienates the fans? And plus, it throws coaching out of wack. I mean, what do you say if a coach takes his team to the tournament year after year after year, and they lose in the "second round," which will now consist of 64 teams? That'll look okay on their coaching record (they'll be 1-1 in the tourney), but that doesn't really mean anything. What I'd like to see is for the NIT to start inviting the top teams for the NCAAs. I would like to see someone try to win both tournaments. Frankly, the NCAAs are a joke. It would be better if the NIT shrunk it back to 16 teams, or 8 teams, and only invited the top teams in the country, so that there couldn't be some ridiculous pretenders winning two games and pushing out good teams. I'm not talking about Northern Iowa or Butler, by the way, but I'll cover that in my next point. I'm talking about teams like George Mason, when they went to the Final Four-- a bad team who snuck by.
2) Duke Winning: Good for College Basketball?
Here's the thing- I grew up hating Duke. Like any good child my age, I knew that I had to pick between liking North Carolina and Duke, and I picked UNC. They had more compelling players. They were more fun to watch. And they looked like they were having fun playing basketball, and not like the Duke kids who looked like they were forced into slave labor or something. When UNC won, they looked happy. When Duke won, they looked relieved. Now, should I love the "team" atmosphere around Duke? Should I like that they work hard? That they're unapologetically consistent? That they don't care what people think about them? Yes, yes, yes, and yes. But you know what? I drew my line in the sand long ago. I couldn't stand the team that was good every year. It's like how I hate the Yankees, the Lakers, the Cowboys, Notre Dame football, Florida State football, and Miami football. Notice the three programs I listed for football, though. Here's the thing: I've lost the hate. Now, they're jokes to me. I've made as many Charlie Weis jokes as anyway, but that's just because Ralph Mangino jokes aren't as funny since no one knows who he is. Plus, now it turns out he chokes people or whatever. Anyway, I think that Duke winning is good, so that I can keep hating them. I like that about college sports. It's fun to have teams you love and teams you hate. Now, admittedly, I was having fun making fun of Duke for their recent choke-jobs in the Sweet Sixteen, but here's the thing: Duke was never a program that I made fun of. That's for programs that aren't the mighty Duke. Duke is just The Enemy. So, am I happy about Duke winning the National Championship game? No. Absolutely not. I wanted to see Butler absolutely stomp them. But, you know what? I'm not as upset about it as I would have been in years past. They're just trying to keep the drama alive in our relationship, and I appreciate it.
3) The Rise of the Mid-Major
Finally, it's here. College basketball has gotten to ignore this for too long. I mean, look at college football. Now, are the higher-ups still in denial? Yes. But they (kind of) give those teams a chance. At least, they keep them competitive until the end, and people are willing to rank mid-majors in the top 10. College hoops, though? They've been living in a dream world in which Gonzaga is the only relevant mid-major. True, Gonzaga has a good program. But here's the thing: is Butler really any better or worse than, say, Purdue? Or South Carolina? Or USC? Or any one of about a thousand schools that seem to make the tournament, beat and overwhelmed opponent, and then lose to a better team? There's no difference. Really, what happened this year is that Butler was a top-5 team in the country (as were Duke, Kansas, Kentucky, and Syracuse). They should have probably garnered a 2 seed-- maybe a 3, if you're skeptical. But they lost a couple of games in their conference, so as a mid-major, that meant they were a nobody, right? Wrong. Wake up, people-- the Horizon League has a lot of good teams and players. This isn't 8 years ago-- you don't need to go undefeated in a mid-major conference to prove you're a good team. Here's the thing about basketball talent: it's spread out all over. There are so many talented players, and too many schools. So, if given the choice between riding the pine for Duke or starting for 4 years and being a god at Butler, what would you do? All I'm saying is, it's no surprise that a lot of really, really talented players are opting for the lesser-named schools. If I knew I were D-1 scholarship level, but I didn't have pro teams already breathing down my neck, I know where I'd go. I'd go where I could have four amazing years of college, and hopefully make a run or two in the tournament. It's an amazing opportunity. Honestly, it's not that hard to imagine the power shift happening in college hoops just like it's happening in college pigskin-- too many good players, not even big-name schools. All of this just means that the "traditional powers" need to start growing eyes in the back of their heads, on the back of their palms, on their ankles, and everywhere else they can, because the mid-majors are absolutely for real. And it's about time.
4) It has to be said
Rarely will you read Jordan or me say anything about women's sports. It's not that we're sexists-- it's just that we haven't grown up following those things, and following them takes a lot more effort than we're willing to put forward. I mean, I don't even follow the NHL, because I didn't grow up in a hockey town. So sue me. I say, it's the fault of the sports media. However, the UConn women's basketball team does merit a lot of mention here, because you'd have to be living under a rock not to know about "the streak." I think it's commendable. If I were coaching them, I think I'd be bored, but that's just me-- and really, that's beside the point. I just want to congratulate the Huskies for their tremendous accomplishment. I'm not going to argue about whether it's good or bad for women's basketball, and I'm not going to critique their run or worry about them winning by "only" six points (ending the double-digit-margin-of-victory streak). I just think it's impressive, and deserves mention in a "State of the Union" sort of column.
No comments:
Post a Comment