Conference Shampionships
No, I didn't forget my spell check, I think conference championships are a sham. Don't get me wrong, they're fun to watch, and as my wife will attest, I can easily get glued to Stephen F. Austin vs Sam Houston State. But do I think they're fair, or even logical? Not by a long shot.
For the non-college basketball aficionados, 68 teams are selected to play in the NCAA national championship tournament. 32 of those spots are reserved for the conference champions, and with the exception of the Ivy League (coincidentally the smartest schools in the country), the "champion" is determined by a weekend tournament. If that still doesn't mean much to you, what this means is that the team that has the best conference record at the end of the regular season (usually 16-20 games) is not guaranteed a spot in the tournament. If you're starting to smell what I'm stepping in, yes, a team that was terrible all season can get their act together for 3-4 games and have a shot to play for the national championship.
Every year, as the field of 68 is put together, the talking heads refer to it as the best 68 teams in college basketball. False. A few of this year's mighty "champions" include:
- Mount St. Mary's with a 16-16 record
- Cal State Poly with a 13-19 record
But it's not just the bad teams getting in, it's the good teams left out. Of the 32 conferences, most of them will only send their automatic bid because they are composed of schools that are small, don't have much money, and therefore do not have the level of talent of the larger schools and conferences. So if you work hard all season, but have a hiccup in a weekend tournament, you're rewarded with a consolation trip to the NIT tournament. As a result we are robbed of seeing teams such as:
- Belmont Bruins - Ohio Valley regular season champions. This team has been to several NCAA tournaments in recent years, so their experience, combined with the fact that they have the 16th ranked offense in the country, made them a dangerous threat to upend a bigger team (they already took out North Carolina earlier in the year). The team that knocked them out, Eastern Kentucky, earned a 15 seed and a quick exit at the hand of Kansas.
- Green Bay Phoenix - Horizon League regular season champions. Not only were they the best team in their conference, they proved themselves against the big boys - upsetting Virginia (yes, the same Virginia that got a 1 seed this year) in the regular season. We were also deprived of seeing one of the best inside-outside combos you probably never heard of in Keifer Sykes and Alec Brown. Instead, they were upset by Wisconsin-Milwaukee, who earned a 15 seed in the NCAA tournament and were quickly escorted by Villanova.
I'd love to spend more time complaining about the injustice of this system, repelling possible arguments against my stance (yes, some people, maybe even you, think this is reasonable), and provide alternative solutions. Instead, I'll just summarize the system as stupid because: 1.) it can punish teams that played great for a whole season, 2.) we don't get to see the true "best 68 teams in the country." The most fair and realistic solution I can think of is to limit conference tournaments to those that finished in the top half of the regular season standings. Moving on....
Evaluating the Big East's Big Divorce
It's been a year since the Big East Conference broke up as part of the domino effect of national conference re-alignment, leaving us with the Big East and American Athletic Conference (AAC). I don't know off the top of my head all the RPI and BPI numbers for each conference (for non hoops fans, those are 2 sets of objective numbers use to rate every team in the country), and really, I don't care. While objective numbers do serve a purpose, the eye test is very valuable too. If I had to pick the most over-rated conference this season, it would be the Big East. Conversely, if I had to pick the most under-rated conference all year, it would be the AAC. I don't know how much basketball the NCAA selection committee saw this season, but they confirmed my observations with their selections:
Villanova gets a 2 seed? There was nothing overly impressive about Villanova this year. Yeah, they got off to a hot start and had some big wins in December, but the rest of the year was spent beating up luke-warm Big East opponents. In both their match-ups against Creighton, they were played out of the gym each time. Speaking of Creighton, take away Doug McDermott, are they really a 3 seed? It was fun watching Baylor beat their brains in this evening. Providence gave UNC a tough first round game, but they were clearly out of gas from their improbable upset run in the Big East tournament (which they entered a bubble team). And who let Xavier into the play-in game (I hate those too, another blog for another day)? I feel like they've been on the tournament bubble since January, and they followed with a lackluster performance in their loss to NC State in the aforementioned play-in.
Can someone explain to me how Louisville finished 5th in the nation and ended up a 4-seed? Well don't look now selection committee, but the defending national champions are in the sweet 16. Meanwhile, Cincinnati, arguably the best defensive team in the country, gets rewarded with a 5 seed (which is inherently cursed) against a really good Harvard team nobody wanted to draw on selection Sunday. And Connecticut gets a 7 seed with that stud backcourt led by Shabazz Napier and Ryan Boatright? I thought it was fitting they showed Villanova what a real Big East team looks like in the round of 32. And poor Memphis. They probably merited an 8 seed, but at least they managed to win a game (currently losing to #1 Virginia at the time of this writing). And how did SMU not get selected? I know, I know, their out of conference schedule is weak. But they also beat good teams (both home and away) in the AAC. Their RPI might not be top 25 (even though they held a spot in both polls for quite a while), but I've SEEN them play, and they LOOK like one of the best 68 teams in the country.
The Big East is half of what it was a year ago (literally, there's half as many teams), yet people still talk about it like it's the gold standard of college hoops. The AAC meanwhile, is severely under the radar. However, when I watched their respective games this season, the AAC was clearly a step above the Big Least (again, not a typo). There will be at least 2 AAC teams in the sweet 16. The rest of the Big East gets to watch them play from home.
Can someone explain to me how Louisville finished 5th in the nation and ended up a 4-seed? Well don't look now selection committee, but the defending national champions are in the sweet 16. Meanwhile, Cincinnati, arguably the best defensive team in the country, gets rewarded with a 5 seed (which is inherently cursed) against a really good Harvard team nobody wanted to draw on selection Sunday. And Connecticut gets a 7 seed with that stud backcourt led by Shabazz Napier and Ryan Boatright? I thought it was fitting they showed Villanova what a real Big East team looks like in the round of 32. And poor Memphis. They probably merited an 8 seed, but at least they managed to win a game (currently losing to #1 Virginia at the time of this writing). And how did SMU not get selected? I know, I know, their out of conference schedule is weak. But they also beat good teams (both home and away) in the AAC. Their RPI might not be top 25 (even though they held a spot in both polls for quite a while), but I've SEEN them play, and they LOOK like one of the best 68 teams in the country.
The Big East is half of what it was a year ago (literally, there's half as many teams), yet people still talk about it like it's the gold standard of college hoops. The AAC meanwhile, is severely under the radar. However, when I watched their respective games this season, the AAC was clearly a step above the Big Least (again, not a typo). There will be at least 2 AAC teams in the sweet 16. The rest of the Big East gets to watch them play from home.
Way to Go Stanford and Dayton!
I had Kansas picked to lose in the 2nd round... to New Mexico. Forget how Stanford managed to win, how did they get there? In watching and reading the analysis of bubble teams for 6 weeks (b-ball definition: a bubble team is a good team, but not considered a lock to get picked as an at-large for the NCAA tournament), there were 5 bubble teams that had Stanford as their "best win." It's hard to convey tone in writing, but it was a very sarcastic "best win." How does a team that got beat by 5 shaky teams, none of which are terribly proud of that win, make it as an at-large selection? I don't know, but I'm happy for their goofy-looking mascot:
And Dayton, why didn't I see this coming? I was struggling to pick between Syracuse and Ohio St. in their hypothetical round of 32 match-up. It wasn't because they were both so good I couldn't pick which one was just a little bit better - I couldn't decide which of these 2 teams that stumbled their way into the tournament would choke first. I should have decided that neither was fit for the sweet 16 and just went with Dayton.
Opening Round Etiquette
I think it's time for all of us who filled out a bracket to pause and remember this is a LONG, LONG tournament. If I had a dime for every time I heard one of the following phrases after 5 games: "I'm perfect in all my picks so far," or "(Fill in upset school here) lost - my bracket is ruined," I wouldn't need to pay $5 to enter my picks for a chance to win $200... I'd have plenty of pocket change! If you fall into one of these categories next March, please, do me and everyone else a favor and at least wait for the round of 32 to be over before you react. One good day definitely doesn't guarantee anything, and one bad day (unless you lose a final 4 pick) doesn't ruin anything. Calm down and enjoy basketball.
And the Best-Dressed Coach Award Goes to...
My wife diligently watched many games with me. Although she was not concerned with winners and losers, she decided that North Carolina's Roy Williams is the best-dressed coach in college basketball!
Another rule for Opening Round Etiquette. If a team who EVERYONE picked like Duke loses, please stop complaining that it ruined your bracket. It didn't. It's a wash.
ReplyDeleteGreat point Scott Fults, nobody except that girl who picked based on favorite colors got Mercer right (you mean she likes orange and black?). No need to freak out, everyone else lost the same points you did.
ReplyDeleteThe following was posted by Kane on Facebook:
ReplyDelete"The debate in any playoffs in any sport has always been between those who 'deserves' to go vs those who 'make the cut.' The real debate should be this- shoułd that many teams/schools be in division 1A basketball?"
Good point and good question, Kane. First, quick disclaimer: overall, I am satisfied with the college basketball system. But the restaurants and retail stores I enjoy the most also get the most complaints from me - I hold them to a higher standard. I'll probably never waste my time with a BCS post (but don't hold me to it).
First, a quick comment on the cut - my issue with college basketball is the moving target between the auto bids and the at-larges. In the NBA (usually not the best example these days on how to run something well), the finals are determined by the winners of the Eastern and Western conference playoffs. However, not every team in both conferences gets a chance to play their way into the NBA finals. So while an 8 seed could potentially (although not likely with the best of 7 format) could make it to the finals, my favorite team, the Utah Jazz will not have that opportunity, because only the top 8 in each conference make the playoffs. The same should apply to college - if you have a losing season, you don't go to the post season. As a result, I would never have had to suffer watching my Temple Owls lose the 8-9 game of the AAC tournament to Central Florida (not a good basketball year for me).
As for number of teams allowed - I'm ok with 300+ Division I schools narrowed down to a field of 64, I just want the right 64. I see the arguments of whether or not a SWAC or MEAC team will ever make noise. But... there's been a growing number Butler's, George Mason's, Gonzaga's, VCU's and Witchita State's over the last two decades that make having the field so big worth it. People like the upsets as well as the overall gluttony of 12 hours of daily basketball for a weekend. Limit the Davids to get more Goliaths, and you're left with college football (I couldn't resist).
But when it all boils down, isn't it all about the money? That's the reason we have conference tourneys, that's why we have expanded fields, and that's why so many "Little Sisters of the Poor" are pushing for D-I status - so the NCAA and the conferences can make more money. That's what makes it even more unfair to me that regular season champions aren't rewarded for their hard work. The players and fans get screwed, while the NCAA gets money. But I digress...