NCAA Basketball Tournament: My Thoughts

Every year, it seems, we go through some of the same issues…  Better NFL overtime rules.  Issues with 1-and-dones in the NCAA going to the NBA.  NASCAR not being a sport.  Cheerleaders and mascots.  Bruce Pearl’s orange suit.  And, of course, expanding the NCAA tournament.

Let’s face it, any sports fan will tell you that the most exciting 4 days of sports are the first 2 rounds of the NCAA tournament.  Basketball for hours on end, dominating the CBS affiliates.  The water-cooler talk about the games the day before, or the buzzer beater you just saw.  Hell, some businesses will even stop working because of this.  (I remember working for the local utility company, who also provides internet and cable to everyone.  I was getting some office training during the first Stephen Curry-dominated Davidson game in the 2008 tournament, and the entire office had their mandatory cable boxes tuned into the tournament, with a whole buffet of snack food on the other end of the office.  No one was working.  Best day of training ever.)  And yet, every year, we manage to debate whether or not the setup is right.

Every year, good teams get left out.  Every year, some really strange teams make it in, either by virtue of winning their conference tournament, or just being “that one” selection that the NCAA committee will make.  Instead of finding joy in this randomness, a lot of people despise it and offer their own opinions on making it better.  And the one we always here?  Expand the tournament.

Look, I see the argument.  Let’s broaden the field, get an extra day of games in somehow.  Lots of people are advocates for 68 teams, so instead of just 1 play-in game (which I find dumb), we’d have 4.  Ok, I can buy that.  That’s 3 more borderline teams that would make it in, and give CBS a couple extra games to televise.  That’s 3 more teams that get to win a tournament game before going on to get stomped on by the #1 seed (but just you wait… one of these years, it’ll happen.  Someone’s gonna get upset, and it will be awesome).

Then there’s the advocate for 96 teams.  24 seeds per bracket, and the top 8 teams get a first round bye.  Possibly.  Again, more teams with opportunity, but now instead of the upsets that the tournament prides itself on producing, it’s almost like you’re just trying to tire out the bottom tiered teams and give the top 8 a relatively easier run towards the title.

And then there are the nutcases.  128 teams.  32 teams per bracket, everyone plays.  When you consider that there are 347 Division 1 basketball teams, that’s still not even 37% of the teams making it to The Big Dance.

I don’t like it.  At all.  Wanna know why?

1) The tournament is supposed to reward teams, and should not be a given for anybody. Perfect example – North Carolina might, just might, miss the NCAA tournament this year.  They’ve had a rough season, and for the first time in a long time, Roy Williams and the Tar Heels might not get an invite.  While I feel bad for them as a team, I am in no way disappointed.  If they make a run in the conference tournament and win it all, ok, fine, they can get in.  Otherwise, if they don’t DESERVE to get in, then go away.  And that goes for anyone, from Kentucky to Texas to South-west-eastern Conneti-massa-fornia.  Seriously.  Your entire season defines the postseason reward.

2) The only reason the NCAA is considering this is for the money. That’s a given.  And it’s stupid.  I understand the reasons to capitalize on the opportunity to make more money.  However, the prestige of this tournament just seems… at risk… by all this expansion talk.  It’s an exclusive club to get into, and thus a prestigious event to win.  We have the NIT for those teams that didn’t do enough to make it in.  Keep sending them there.

3) Diluting the talent pool is not the answer. And don’t tell me that we wouldn’t be diluting it.  You can’t add that many more teams and tell me that the quality of teams is still going to be that elevated.

Frankly, the only reason that I am a fan of this is for the mid-majors.  I attend the University of Northern Iowa, a member of the Missouri Valley Conference.  I would be thrilled to pieces to see Wichita State make the tournament this year.  Will it happen?  Probably not.  Even though they’ve got a 23-8 record and have beaten 2 ranked opponents (Texas Tech and UNI), getting 2 teams from a mid-major is a rarity.  Heck, even though UNI has been ranked for most of the 2nd half of the NCAA season (or at least flirting on the edge of the rankings), a bad loss to Evansville last week means that if we don’t win the tournament, we might not make it into the dance.  Yikes.

Also… think about those “last 4 teams in”/”first 4 teams out”.  Every year, some big name teams are “bubble” teams.  In theory, the ones in the most danger of missing the tournament.  The ones that make it in… where are they seeded?  10-14.  Always.  A very small amount of 9s, and a very small amount of 15s.  I can’t ever recall a “bubble team” being a 16 seed, ever.  Please correct me if I’m wrong.

I. Don’t. Get. This.

If you are a “bubble team”, I feel that you are the least deserving team to make it.  You didn’t win your tournament.  You obviously have had a rocky season.  So why are you getting ranked above teams that have played their butts off, won their tournaments, and/or have had outstanding seasons?  It’s so… well, stupid.  At the time of writing this, Notre Dame, Connecticut, Rhode Island, and San Diego State were the 4 teams listed as the last 4 in.  3 of these teams should be listed as 16 seeds, and the last one participates in the play-in game.  Doesn’t that seem right?

I can’t believe I’m suggesting this… but why don’t we throw all the stats and whatnot into a computer program and let it spit out our brackets for us?  We always talk about teams having to pass the “eye” test, but doesn’t that lead towards bias?  I’d think so.  That’s part of what makes the BCS kinda messed up, is the fact that humans still have their hands in things.  The games “select” their teams based on what they think will be the best draw for fans and media.

And then… are you seriously telling me that there are non-basketball people… hell, even non-sports people on the tournament selection committee?  Seriously?  You’ve got to be out of your mind.  I remember Bob Knight having a cow about this last year on ESPN, and I totally agree.  *If* you’re going to be using humans to select this bracket, then for the love of sports, put people on the committee that know what they’re doing.

So, what do I think needs to be done?

1. No expansion.  None.  If anything, cut that 65th team out and go back to 64 teams.
2. Seed teams appropriately.  If you’re a bubble team, that means you’re hovering on whether or not you’re the 16th seed, or out.  Not somewhere in the middle.
3. Cut the bias.  If you’re going to use a selection committee, then don’t have names on the portfolios of the teams, nor on the records of who they’ve beaten.  You see record, RPI, scores, and the like, and that’s it.

And hey, all you “power conference” teams… stop being so scared of the mid-majors.  Poor babies, you might lose to a good team and tarnish your reputation.  Suck it up and play, you cowards.

Advertisement