Don't get me wrong, I love this tournament like Iggy Pop loves heroin. I'm obsessed about it to the point that it's probably not healthy. I'm even using up vacation days so that I don't have to come up with a bullshit excuse for missing work. And it's not that I wasn't excited when the brackets were announced, either. Their mere existence fills me of anticipation. I'm not exaggerating when I say, "This is my Christmas."
So why the indifferent reaction from yours truly?
Well, I suppose it's because the Selection Committee got it right. Sure, there are a few teams who may have a legitimate case for inclusion, but it's not because they were really "deserving." Rather, it's because so few teams - including teams that DID receive bids to the tournament - were really "deserving." Therein lies my subtle apathy.
Exhibit A.) There's not much to complain about. I have a few beefs with the way a few teams were seeded, but I can't be assed to get too upset about it. There are a few double-digit seeds that are playing a little too close to home, but it really feel like I'm being nit-picky. The major-conference talking heads on ESPN's Bracketology show would have you believe that Arizona State and Virginia Tech were far more deserving than South Alabama, St. Mary's or Baylor, but it's not true. There was little to separate the teams on the bubble, and none of the admissions or omissions are really that outlandish. It's just more sensationalism; latching onto whatever flaws can be found and crying "bloody murder." So predictable was the bracket that both of ESPN.com's college basketball gurus (Joe Lundardi and Andy Glockner, for those that don't know) were both 100% correct in guessing which teams would receive bids. In truth, the controversy is sort of what's great about Selection Sunday. It's more fun to get your panties in a bunch than to take a glance at the bracket and say, "Hmm. That makes sense." It's ridiculous, I know.
Exhibit B.) This might be the worst field since the Tournament expanded to 64 (now 65) teams. The elite teams are as good as any elite teams to participate in the tournament, and there's not a single team for which I would say, "I'll take this team, you take the rest of the field." There are about eight of these elite teams, and there are about six teams that are a half-step below them in terms of quality. Beyond those 14, the field is weak weak weak. You may have heard a few people lament the fact that the bubble was exceptionally soft in the two weeks leading up to the Tournament. It's been that way for well over a month now, and very few teams did anything to distinguish themselves from anyone else. In any other year, there's no way a team that lost at home to Gardner-Webb and San Diego would have even been in the discussion. This year, they are in safely. The bubble teams that did manage to record a few good wins either coupled those with horrendous losses or other wins against laughably bad competition. The teams that benefitted most and actually received bids, often did so simply by avoiding really, really bad losses...despite not really beating anyone of any substance. There are reasons for all of this, most of which revolve around quality small-conference teams being unable to schedule games against quality major-conference teams, but an entire blog could be written about that.
Beyond the bubble, even some of the automatic bids were disappointing. There are a handful of teams from extremely small conferences that proved they could hang with some major conference opponents. Since they had no hope of receiving an at-large bid despite winning their respective conferences, their only hope was in winning their conference tournaments. Stephen F. Austin very well could have been a popular pick as a true bracket buster, as they had already beaten Oklahoma during the season. They fell to Northwestern State in the Southland Conference Tournament semifinals. Robert Morris beat Boston College in Boston, but fell in the semis of the Northeast Conference Tournament. Morgan State sat atop a much-improved MEAC for the majority of the season. They received the 1 seed in their tournament, yet lost to a 20-loss Coppin State team that now finds itself playing in tonight's play-in game. UNC-Asheville gave North Carolina and Tennessee both stern tests during the season (and they have a 7'7" giant playing for them), but they lost on their homecourt to a Winthrop team they had previously beaten twice this season.
Essentially, the top of this tournament is very good, the middle and bottom tiers of teams are much weaker than normal.
Exhibit C.) The Selection Committee has a habit of matching intriguing small-conference teams against fellow intriguing small-conference teams. Historically, I've spent three days before the tournament tips off salivating over the chances of very capable David's against unprepared Goliath's. For at least two year's now, the Selection Committee has deprived us of this. Last year, they paired a good Old Dominion team against a very good Butler team. Creighton and Nevada, both of whom have made Sweet 16 appearances in recent memory, were left to play each other.
This seems to have gotten worse. Very capable teams like Drake, Gonzaga, Kent State and Butler are all paired with equally capable and just as intriguing teams like Western Kentucky, Davidson, UNLV, and South Alabama. Much of the appeal of the first two rounds revolves around these smaller teams finally getting a shot at the big boys on a neutral court. While these current matchups at least ensure that a smaller team is going to make it into the next round, they also take a little luster off of what makes this the best sporting event of the year (suck it, Super Bowl).
The NCAA Tournament itself is not doomed to be as tepid as the release of its bracket, but it's made the time between Selection Sunday and Tipoff all the more excruciating without anything to debate ad nauseum. I can only imagine how bored you must be, having just read an article about how the bracket itself is not interesting.
No comments:
Post a Comment