The College Basketball Top 25 Purpose Debate… Watch Me Pull A Ranking Out of My Hat!

February 15, 2011

Read the opposing argument from Optimist Prime.

When I was eight years old I thought the greatest illusion ever performed happened on my television when I watched David Copperfield walk through the Great Wall of China.

Then I discovered college basketball.

The NCAA Division I basketball, each year, pulls off a feat that would make Blackstone ask, “How’d they do that?!” What is the illusion, you ask? It is the illusion that there is any value at all to the top 25 ranking.

In college football, the top 25 rankings serve a very important function. They help to determine which teams get to participate in the series of the biggest bowl games, and ultimately which two teams will compete for the National Championship.

What purpose does the top 25 poll serve in basketball?

Last year, do you know what the respective national rankings were for Duke and Butler as they entered March Madness? Duke was ranked fourth in the nation, while Butler was ranked number 12. Despite those rankings (which in College Football earned #12 Missouri an invitation to the Insight Bowl… Ooooohhhh!!!!), those were the two teams that faced off for the crown last April.

Unlike the Football Bowl Subdivision of the NCAA, every single one of the more than 300 teams in Division I basketball kick the season off with an opportunity to compete for the National Championship. They don’t have to impress any voters, or beat the “right” teams. They don’t even have to have a good regular season.

All they have to do is win the conference tournament.

Sure, the worse a team does in the regular season, the tougher their road to, and through, the national tournament is, but that doesn’t change the simple fact that a team needs only to win in the post-season, and it is through to the Tournament.

If the top 25 rankings are irrelevant and unnecessary when populating the 64 teams for the national championship tournament, they must SURELY impact the seeding in the tournament, don’t they? I mean it only makes sense to do it that way. Teams ranked one through four would be given one-seeds, then the teams ranked five through eight get two-seeds, and so on.

WRONG!

Last year, for example, the teams ranked one through four did each earn a top seed in the national tournament (Kansas, Duke, Syracuse, and Kentucky).

So what about the two-seeds?

After the top four in the rankings came Ohio State (fifth in the nation), Purdue (sixth), West Virginia (seventh), and New Mexico (eighth). But neither Purdue nor New Mexico were rewarded with the second spot in their respective brackets. Instead, it was Ohio State, West Virginia, Kansas State (ranked ninth in the country) and Villanova (ranked tenth).

New Mexico actually received a three-seed, and Purdue (the sixth best team in the country, according to the national rankings) was bumped all the way down to a four-seed, while Baylor (the 21st ranked team in the country) was seeded third, ahead of them in the same region.

What led to the disparity between the national rankings and the seedings for the national tournament? Once again, it was the selection committee.

Rather than overload a region with too many teams from the same conference, or with a prospective high-powered regular season rematch too early in the dance, they try to distribute the Major Conference representatives evenly across the bracket, regardless of their projected worth on the national stage.

Now, as this year draws towards another March full of basketball Madness, fans of the San Diego State Aztecs (currently ranked sixth in the nation by the AP) can expect the same head-scratching logic as an answer to the questions of why they were seeded third or fourth – behind some big-named program from a big-named conference like the 20-team Big East – that will simply ride the merits of their name and neighborhood into an easier road to Houston.

The top 25 rankings are completely worthless in college basketball. They provide water cooler conversation at the workplace, and give sportswriters something to do each week in the football off-season. But when it comes to what really matters (a chance at the national championship), they hold as much value as a Mel Kiper, Jr. mock draft.

My Zimbio Blog Directory Sport Blogs - BlogCatalog Blog Directory
Add us to your technorati favorites Digg! Bookmark and Share

Leave a Comment » | The College Basketball Top 25 Purpose Debate | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by Bleacher Fan

The Freshman on the Pre-Season All-American Team Debate Verdict

November 10, 2010

Read the opposing arguments from Loyal Homer and Optimist Prime.

While I completely agree with Optimist Prime’s main point that these types of pre-season honors do not really matter, it became clear to the editorial staff here at TSD that a great many fans do in fact care deeply about a freshman being allowed to appear on a pre-season All-American team.

Before diving into the arguments I do want to call attention to one point from Optimist Prime that I vehemently oppose. The notion that basketball is an individual game is flat wrong. It is true that the individual nature of the reward we’re debating today is inescapable, but the irony lies in the fact that the sport – especially at the collegiate level – relies heavily on team achievement, and much less on the abilities of a single player. Team’s have a hierarchy of talent, but college basketball isn’t great because each team is just a disjointed conglomeration of individual talent. Successful teams work together flawlessly, and the vast majority of championship teams prove that out.

As Optimist points out, in total fairness, the freshman did not appoint himself to the team. Rather, a membership group of sports media elite did that. That is not the player’s fault. It is, however, proof that the “award” is ridiculous. Fair point, Optimist Prime.

But, regardless of the award’s fairness from a media standpoint, it is counter-intuitive – and it should be counter-culture – to lavish anyone with awards and esteem who has done nothing to earn it. Barnes may become a great college player, but it’s impossible to agree that he would then, retroactively, deserve the pre-season All-American team honors as a freshman. Freshmen have not proven anything on the court in a college atmosphere, a fair and acknowledged point from Loyal Homer.

If the purpose of the award is to give the nod to players who show tremendous potential, then have a freshmen All-American team (which does exist). But, and the winning arguer Loyal Homer so succinctly stated, to include a freshman in the overall pre-season All-American cheapens the entire team.

Sure, I understand the game of college basketball has evolved. Freshman now rule the roost in part because an early departure for the elite players is now standard practice. But NBA draft prospects are completely different that All-American honors. There was a simpler time when professional prospect didn’t influence a college player’s perception at all. The All-American award harkens a simpler, more pure time in sports, and giving a freshman the nod for is a deep and irreversible stain.

Maybe this Sports Geek is old school, but whatever happened to earning an award? With respect to Optimist’s argument that Barnes has been evaluated at countless camps in the off-season and AAU environments over the course of his prep career, Barnes hasn’t won a game with a last minute shot in Cameron Indoor. He hasn’t gone on the road in Little John Arena and beaten a pesky Clemson club in conference with a tough road game. He hasn’t proven his mettle in a conference tournament or propelled his team to a berth in the NCAA Tournament. He may appear to have the pedigree to accomplish those feats, but let’s ease up on the praise and awards until he proves worthy. It might be old fashioned, but it’s also the right thing.

My Zimbio Blog Directory Sport Blogs - BlogCatalog Blog Directory
Add us to your technorati favorites Digg! Bookmark and Share

Leave a Comment » | The Freshman on the Pre-Season All-American Team Debate | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by Sports Geek

The Freshman on the Pre-Season All-American Team Debate

November 9, 2010

Read the opposing arguments from Loyal Homer and Optimist Prime.

It is always an honor for a team and an individual player to be named to the pre-season All-American team. This pre-season is no different, as four veteran college basketball players have earned their way on to the high profile and well respected pre-season All-American team.

This season’s team consists of the following players:

  • Kyle Singler, Duke, C/F, Senior
  • Jacob Pullen, Kansas State, G, Senior
  • Jimmer Fridette, BYU, G, Senior
  • JuJaun Johnson, Purdue, C/F, Senior

  • Harrison Barnes, North Carolina, F/G, Freshman

The team is chosen by a panel consisting of 65 national media personalities. One player in particular sticks out of the lineup. Barnes is a true freshman for North Carolina. He has never once bounced a round orange call on the hard wood in a college game atmosphere. Yet, the 65 national media personalities that chose the players for this team honored him with All-American status.

Did the panel get it right? Do freshman deserve to be included on the Pre-Season All-American team?

Optimist Prime believes that a freshman like Barnes should be allowed to be named to the team while Loyal Homer will argue that a freshman has not yet earned the right to be called All-American, even on a pre-season team.

Convince a pragmatist a freshman belongs on the team. Good luck.

My Zimbio Blog Directory Sport Blogs - BlogCatalog Blog Directory
Add us to your technorati favorites Digg! Bookmark and Share

Leave a Comment » | The Freshman on the Pre-Season All-American Team Debate | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by Sports Geek

The Freshman on the Pre-Season All-American Team Debate… Freshmen Deserve A Chance

November 9, 2010

Read the opposing argument from Loyal Homer.

Many sports fans have excitedly picked up their pre-season football, basketball, baseball, or hockey preview magazines, flipped to the section detailing their team, and done a little fist pumping when they read, “Team X’s Star Player Y is positioned for a breakout year. He is the Mid-Atlantic Culinary School Association’s pre-season player of the year.”

That same fan then sees star player Y fulfill that promise, or even drag his shiny pre-season player of the year trophy to the bench, halfway through the season. Indeed, it seems like the latter happens far more than the former. Having been in the shoes of those fans, I feel like I can legitimately argue that a freshman should be eligible for consideration for pre-season All-American honors because, honestly, do they really matter that much? As a bonus, I’ll also have an argument for those of you who do think pre-season All-American honors do matter. In order to keep things brief, we’ll consider only the basketball award during this debate.

First, let’s consider the meat of what a pre-season All-American team “invitation,” even a notable one such as the Associated Press, actually means. Typically these awards end up as footnotes on a player’s career, or bullet points on a television broadcast of their team’s games during the season. The player does not receive monetary compensation for this award and it does not entitle him to anything other than being an answer to a trivia question after his playing days conclude. If you agree that the AP All-America team is the most prestigious pre-season All-American team, factor in that the voting is done by the same 65-member national media panel that votes on the AP top 25 poll each week. The award is not a validation by your peers, your competitors, your coaches, other coaches, etc. It is simply a tip of the cap from people who cover your sport for a living. While that is, without a doubt, a nice accomplishment and a feather in a player’s cap, it seems completely unreasonable to keep freshmen from having the pleasure of reading online, “These reporters think I’m going to be one of the top players in the country this year.” Freshmen in the running for an All-American “invite” will have heard their name countless times in countless mediums – why prevent them from receiving a slightly more prestigious, slightly more official honor?

Second, as promised, if you think a pre-season All-American acknowledgement is a meaningful, worthwhile award, why would you deny sportswriters the ability to bestow that honor on any player they so choose? While I’m not saying Harrison Barnes or Brandon Knight, at this very moment, belong in the same mention as Tyler Hansbrough or John Wall, who’s to say that a majority of sportswriters do want to say that? I cannot think of a reason to deny those professional basketball watchers/writers that ability unless we go back to the days when freshmen could not play on the varsity team. Moreover, if the argument is that you cannot legitimately evaluate a player’s game until he plays at the college level, I can respect that argument while debunking it at the same time. While there is no doubt that the college game is different, modern freshmen have been evaluated for years at shoe camps, AAU tournaments, pickup games, etc. Their individual game is not a mystery and an All-American honor is just that – an individual honor for their individual game.

If the freshmen are used in the marketing and promotion of college basketball, why deny them the opportunity at a pat on the back before the season starts?

My Zimbio Blog Directory Sport Blogs - BlogCatalog Blog Directory
Add us to your technorati favorites Digg! Bookmark and Share

Leave a Comment » | The Freshman on the Pre-Season All-American Team Debate | Tagged: , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by Optimist Prime

The Connecticut Women’s Basketball Winning Streak Debate… I’ll Take Irrelevant Sports Trivia For $400, Alex

April 6, 2010

Read the opposing argument from Babe Ruthless.

I do not care what sport we are talking about, a win streak of 77 games (and counting) is legendary. The feat that the University of Connecticut women’s basketball team has already accomplished, even if it should end tonight, is nothing short of amazing.

As a result of this historic run, the Lady Huskies and the University of Connecticut stand to benefit greatly. The attention this accomplishment has garnered for their women’s basketball program, and their school in general, along with the accolades already won by the team, will help to maintain successful recruiting for the program for many years to come. That, however, is where the benefit stops.

I won’t go so far as to say that this story is “bad” for women’s college basketball in general. I don’t think this story will cause any fans to LEAVE the game. However, it will not technically be “good” for the sport either, because when all is said and done this will not have changed public opinion or interest for women’s college basketball one way or the other.

Forgive my bluntness, but the VAST MAJORITY of the sports-viewing public simply does not care about women’s college basketball, and this is not a story that will attract new fans to the game.

Want proof that nobody cares about this story? Just scan the front pages of major sports news outlets on the Internet and try to find ANY reference to the streak OR to women’s college basketball in general. As I write this article, here is what you will find (keep in mind that the streak is still alive, and the championship game takes place TODAY):

Sports Illustrated’s front page has stories about Duke’s national championship, the NBA Hall of Fame inductees, several stories about various baseball games, and a story about the Lakers’ head coach, Phil Jackson, being fined $35K for criticizing referees. No women’s college basketball here…

ESPN has, in addition to the coverage of Duke and Phil Jackson’s fine, stories about Donovan McNabb’s contract negotiations with the Redskins, Milwaukee Bucks’ center Andrew Bogut’s hand injury, and Tiger Woods’ denial of taking HGH. No women’s college basketball here, either (Editor’s Note: Interetsing because UConn’s championship game is ESPN’s primetime content tonight.)…

Those headlines are basically the same for Fox Sports, CBS Sports, and Sporting News as well.

None of those outlets even MENTION women’s basketball, even though the championship game is today and UConn’s win streak is still alive. In fact, the reference I could find on any major sports outlets’ front-page is at USA Today, where there is a small blurb linking to a story about the matchup between UConn forward Maya Moore and Stanford forward Nnemkadi Ogwumike, but you have to scroll about half-way down the page to find where it is buried.

The fact is that this run, no matter how impressive it has been, has not garnered any interest at all for the sport of women’s basketball. Anybody who watches the championship game tonight would have watched it whether this streak was at stake or not. NOBODY will tune in because of the streak… it is as simple as that.

Do you remember Ken Jennings?

His record-breaking championship run on the game show Jeopardy warranted the occasional anecdotal reference while it was ongoing, but it did not drive fan-interest in the overall product. Seriously, can you name one person who NOW watches Jeopardy because they became a fan after being drawn in by the story of Ken Jennings? Can you even find one person who knows how long Jennings’ streak was, how much money he won, or who beat him? I can’t.

Just as Ken Jennings’ championship run has amounted to nothing more than a pop-culture trivia tidbit of information, the UConn Lady Huskies’ win-streak will amount to nothing more than a sports trivia tidbit of information (which after a couple years, ironically, will only be remembered by the likes of Ken Jennings).

This is a tremendous accomplishment, and it is one that the women of UConn should be EXTREMELY proud of. The sport of women’s college basketball, however, needs much more than a simple story about a record win-streak if they hope to drive fan interest. When the Lady Huskies lose again this win streak will become nothing more than another statistic. It will fade into dust-covered irrelevance and we will not hear about it again until another team comes along (probably not for another 30 years) to challenge their record.

By the way – Lost and American Idol are both on tonight!

My Zimbio Blog Directory Sport Blogs - BlogCatalog Blog Directory
Add us to your technorati favorites Digg! Bookmark and Share

4 Comments | The Connecticut Women’s Basketball Winning Streak Debate | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by Bleacher Fan

The Dropping Mid from Mid-Major Debate… I See Your True Colors Shining Through

April 1, 2010

Read the opposing argument from Loyal Homer.

All over this great nation of ours society has forced many of its schools to conform to a lifestyle that they can no longer abide by. No matter how much society tries to ignore the writing on the wall, they simply cannot deny the truth that is as plain as the nose on their collective faces.

Mid-major conferences have been pretending to be “MID” for long enough, and they cannot live that lie anymore. It is time that we all start recognizing them for what they really are – MAJORS.

You can try to deny it all you want. You can scream that it is not right, or not normal. You can talk about how “mid” major programs are not supposed to compete with the big boys, or that they CANNOT compete with the big boys. You can use flawed logic that “mid” majors should only play to a “mid” level performance, because that is how it has always been, and that is how it SHOULD be. What you cannot do, though, is deny the facts.

March Not-So-Madness

It seems that the 2010 March Madness tournament has finally given these once downtrodden teams a voice, and their indomitable spirit has shone through!

For starters, the 2010 Sweet Sixteen featured representatives from ELEVEN different conferences. Joining the “regular” party-goers this year were contingents from the Ivy League, Missouri Valley, Horizon League, Atlantic-10, and the West Coast Conferences.

The tournament favorite Kansas Jayhawks fell to the MVC champion Northern Iowa Panthers.

Ohio Valley champion Murray State upended SEC Vanderbilt’s tournament hopes.

Ivy Leaguers from Cornell stormed through the Big Ten’s Wisconsin Badgers.

The most damaging piece of evidence for power conference traditionalists, though, was the collapse of their mightiest conference, the Big East. Of the seven teams from the Big East that are no longer in contention, FIVE of them fell at the hands of “mid” major schools, including top-seeded Syracuse losing to Butler (Horizon League). Second-seeded Villanova lost to the St. Mary’s (West Coast). The Georgetown Hoyas, after earning a three-seed in the tournament, were EMBARRASSED in their first-round matchup against Ohio University (who finished the regular season as the NINTH PLACE TEAM out of the MAC). Rounding out the Big East’s undoing, Notre Dame was toppled by Old Dominion (Colonial), and Pitt lost to Xavier (Atlantic-10).

Regular Season Stereotypes

In a feeble attempt to counter this argument, traditionalists will point to the regular season as proof that the old standards NORMALLY hold firm, and that flukes are BOUND to occur in a tournament where 65 games take place. DO NOT BUY INTO THAT FLAWED ARGUMENT!

The regular season is structured specifically to favor power conferences, and “mid” majors are put at a disadvantage before they even step on the court. Think about it. When was the last time Duke travelled into the MEAC to take on a school like Bethune-Cookman? How about NEVER!

“Mid” majors are constantly forced to travel far away from home into hostile environments where foreign officiating crews will govern their play – not exactly a level playing field. Yet, the power conference schools are unwilling to return that favor and put their own reputations at risk by travelling into a “mid” major program’s neighborhood. Proponents of this system claim that powers have nothing to gain and everything to lose by putting their records at risk against teams that they perceive as being a lesser class than their own.

If these power conference programs were TRULY confident that they were superior to the “mids” then they would not be AFRAID to put their status on the line. The REAL TRUTH of the matter is that these programs KNOW the gap between powers and “mids” has been narrowed, and they are relying on myths and stereotypes to propagate a system that artificially manufactures a separation in class, rather than embrace a field of OPEN competition to truly determine who is the best.

For proof, look no further than Kansas and Cornell. During the regular season, Cornell travelled into Kansas to take on the Jayhawks. In a game played at Big XII’s own Phog Allen Fieldhouse in Lawrence, KS, officiated by a Big XII crew, the Big Red from Cornell stood TIED with Kansas with only 0:17 seconds left in the game, before Kansas finally EEKED out a win at the foul-line.

Fast-forward to the NCAA tournament, where games are instead played on neutral courts with neutral officiating crews, and what happens – Kansas loses to a “mid” in the second round, and Cornell reaches the Sweet Sixteen over Temple (ranked #17 in the country) and Wisconsin (a power conference team that was ranked #13 in the nation).

Just imagine what would have happened if the Cornell-Kansas game was played on a neutral site, or at Cornell.

I know there will be teams at the bottom of these “mid” major conferences that struggle, but how is that different from the power conferences, with teams like Northwestern who have NEVER been to March Madness?

Am I saying that power conferences are worse than “mid” majors? Of course not, but it is time to stop treating “mid” major schools as if they were second-class programs that cannot match up against “real” Division I programs.

The curtain has been pulled back, the myth has been busted, and the lies have been exposed. It is time to demand equal rights and recognition for teams and conferences that are truly EQUAL!

My Zimbio Blog Directory Sport Blogs - BlogCatalog Blog Directory
Add us to your technorati favorites Digg! Bookmark and Share

Leave a Comment » | The Dropping Mid from Mid-Major Debate | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by Bleacher Fan

The Best 2010 NCAAB Championship Game Debate… There Should Be a First Time for Everything

March 29, 2010

Read the opposing arguments from Loyal Homer and Sports Geek.

Duke and Michigan State have made the Final Four… yawn!

In no way are my comments intended to diminish the impressive accomplishment that both schools have made. But let’s be honest – it is nothing new. And in this March Madness tournament, where the unprecedented has become the only precedent, there just is not any room on my wish list for programs and coaches who visit the Final Four with the same seeming regularity as my weekly trips to the grocery store.

Their counterparts, however, in the collection of 2010 NCAA Tournament Regional Champions are about to experience something altogether new.

It has been more than 50 years since the West Virginia Mountaineers last reached the Final Four with a shot to compete for the national championship, and 2010 marks the first time since the Calvin Coolidge administration that the Butler Bulldogs are in consideration for the nation’s top basketball prize. In this tournament of firsts, it only seems fitting that the championship matchup should pit two teams against each other that are competing for their first ever tournament title.

More important is the fact that both West Virginia and Butler are more deserving of the crown than Duke and Michigan State.

To begin with, neither of these teams should be a surprise as Final Four participants. Although Butler is coming out of the mid-major Horizon League Conference, they are the owners of the longest active winning streak in the country with their last loss coming at the hands of UAB BEFORE Christmas last year! Throughout the season they faced off against (and defeated) some of the top teams in the country, including victories over Ohio State and Xavier, both of whom were Sweet Sixteen teams.

As for West Virginia, the Mountaineers simply have too much talent on the floor to be stopped. In a year where much of the talent within the “usual” Big East powerhouses would be lacking (I TOLD YOU SO!), the combination of Da’Sean Butler, Devin Ebanks, and Joe Mazzulla was more than enough to carry the Big East banner deep into the 2010 tournament. Behind their seemingly re-invented head coach, Bob Huggins, this Mountaineers team has played like a team of destiny all season long.

Next, when comparing the tournament roads that each of the respective regional champions took to get to the Final Four, Butler and West Virginia have clearly faced off against the tougher competition, and both have survived intact. Butler had to take on and defeat both of the top two teams within their region (Syracuse and Kansas State) in order to continue the nation’s longest active win-streak. West Virginia was handed the task of beating the Kentucky Wildcats, a team which led the rankings as the nation’s top program for much of the 2009-2010 season (at least when Kansas wasn’t).

Compare that to Duke, who coasted into the Final Four as the beneficiaries of the weakest regional draw in the tournament, or to Michigan State, who played lesser-ranked teams in both of their Sweet Sixteen (against ninth-seeded Northern Iowa) and Elite Eight (versus sixth-seeded Tennessee) matchups.

While Butler and West Virginia were busy taking care of the so-called best teams in the country, Duke and Michigan State simply sat back and let other teams do all the hard work, while they just cleaned up the scraps.

Butler and West Virginia have already proven to be the best two teams remaining in the tournament, because they have both BEATEN the teams previously recognized as the best in the tournament. A championship game featuring these two teams would provide one of the most entertaining and dramatic tournament finals in memory.

If we have learned anything from the 2010 March Madness tournament, it is that the “establishment” needs to be shaken up a little bit. What was once considered gospel in the world of college basketball can no longer be counted on. The tried and true principles that we have assigned to the game of college hoops for years no longer seems viable, and we are now forced with redefining our criteria for recognizing the top teams in the country. It is time to see some new faces on top of the heap, and what better way to cap off this season of revolution than with a Butler-West Virginia national championship?.

My Zimbio Blog Directory Sport Blogs - BlogCatalog Blog Directory
Add us to your technorati favorites Digg! Bookmark and Share

Leave a Comment » | The Best 2010 NCAAB Championship Game Debate | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by Bleacher Fan

The 2000-2010 Best NCAAB Tournament Coach Debate… Living in the Wild Wild West

March 24, 2010

Read the opposing arguments from Loyal Homer and Sports Geek.

Oh, what a difference a weekend can make.

This time last week, basketball fans everywhere were filling out brackets. Basketball know-it-alls around the country were confidently making their can’t-miss picks for the tournaments. You could hear them at water-coolers everywhere:

“The Big East is the best conference going into the tournament! They have eight teams, and any one of them can make a run!”

“Kansas is far and away the favorite to take this tournament!”

“The Pac-10 teams are ALL down this year!”

Then the weekend happened. The only sound heard in living rooms and sports bars alike was that of brackets being busted.

Of the eight Big East “monsters” that were all seeded as favorites in their matchups, only four survived the first round, with two more falling before the Sweet Sixteen. Kansas, the number one seed overall, was bounced by mid-major Northern Iowa, and the Pac-10’s only two entrants. California and Washington turned in some very exciting performances with the 11th seeded Huskies reaching the Sweet Sixteen over top-ten ranked New Mexico.

NOBODY could have guessed the carnage that so many underdogs would have wreaked on the 2010 NCAA Basketball championships. In fact, ESPN.com reports that, out of the 4.78 million entries in their online bracket challenge, there were none (that’s ZERO) that had predicted all of the Sweet Sixteen teams (Editor’s note: One dude has a perfect bracket on CBS), and only four people out of the nearly five millions even picked 15 out of 16 correct (but there were more than 6,000 who went 0 for 16).

With the upheaval of the past weekend, the question must be re-asked: Which region of the 2010 March Madness Tournament is NOW the toughest to win?

In looking at the sixteen teams still alive and vying for the national crown, the four which pose the toughest collection of competition for each other live in the Wild West.

Each region claims strong teams, and each also boasts a great story, from Cornell’s run in the east to Northern Iowa’s toppling of the giant in the Midwest. The West, though, possesses the strongest collection of FOUR teams still remaining.

With all due respect to programs such as Northern Iowa, St. Mary’s, Cornell, or even Washington, their success has been surprising, and by all accounts should be short-lived. As much as I would love to see each of those teams advance deeper into this tournament, the EXPECTED result (although I will acknowledge that this tournament has provided anything BUT expected results) is that their 15 minutes is quickly drawing to a close now that they are facing progressively more talented competition.

Because of those EXPECTED outcomes, each of those double-digit seeded teams creates a seemingly weaker spot in the “Road to the Final Four.” Realistically, if I had to choose between Syracuse or St. Mary’s as my opponent, I would pick St. Mary’s.

Each of the regions in the March Madness tournament holds at least one of those double-digit seeded “weaker” team in it except for one – the West Region. The West may have two teams from mid-major conferences remaining (Xavier and Butler), but these teams are mid-major in name only. Both have proven all season long (and consistently over several seasons) that they are wolves in sheep’s clothing. Like Gonzaga and Memphis (at least while John Calipari was coaching on Beale Street), these two programs are worthy of power-conference status.

Occupying the remaining spots in this region are top-seeded Syracuse and second-seeded Kansas State.

Syracuse was the biggest surprise story of the regular season. They began their 2009-2010 campaign unranked before playing all the way up to the top spot in the country, ultimately finishing the season in the third spot behind Kentucky and Kansas. As for Kansas State, they probably would have been a number one seed in the tournament had it not been for three losses against Kansas (who are now out of the picture and no longer a threat to the Wildcats).

In a seed-by-seed comparison, the West poses the toughest overall road to the regional championship games. Along with the East, the West is the only region with both of their top two seeds still alive, and they are the ONLY region that does not include at least one double-digit seeded team. All four of the teams in the West finished 2010 ranked in the top-25, and all four of those teams have a LEGITIMATE shot at playing in Indianapolis.

While all 16 teams remaining deserve recognition for their accomplishments this season, the toughest challenge still lies ahead for the four teams playing in Salt Lake City this weekend!

My Zimbio Blog Directory Sport Blogs - BlogCatalog Blog Directory
Add us to your technorati favorites Digg! Bookmark and Share

Leave a Comment » | The 2010 NCAA Tourney Toughest Region Debate Redux | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by Bleacher Fan

The 2010 Best Sweet 16 Story Debate… Big Games from Big Red

March 22, 2010

Read the opposing arguments from Loyal Homer/Bet Loser and Sports Geek.

My first thought for this debate was to argue The Ohio State Buckeyes, who won a very impressive game against Georgia Tech yesterday afternoon. However, Loyal Homer was practically BEGGING me to let him argue on behalf of his new favorite team, so I acquiesced. (Editor’s Note: Loyal Homer lost a bet to Bleacher Fan and had to write about the Buckeyes. Check it out! He makes a good case.)

I have also already discussed the talent and potential of the Xavier Musketeers who rolled into the Sweet Sixteen over the Pitt Panthers yesterday, making them another of the many hapless Big East teams to crumble under the pressures of this March Madness tournament.

But Xavier and Ohio State make up only two of the teams still remaining in contention for the 2010 NCAA Basketball national championship, and neither have been a part of the REAL story of this March Madness. The REAL story has been the increased (but not surprising) success of longshot underdogs and mid-majors against some of the so-called best teams in the country.

Davids like Northern Iowa, Old Dominion, Ohio, Murray State, and St. Mary’s have already slain Goliaths from the power conferences like Georgetown, Villanova, Notre Dame, Vanderbilt, and even the overall top-seeded Kansas Jayhawks. Because of these mighty minis, no office pool bracket survived the first weekend of competition unscathed.

No team, however, has captured the spirit of “The Little Engine That Could” more than the Cornell Big Red. Defying odds, stereotypes, and history, the Big Red have rolled into the Sweet Sixteen as the highest seed still standing. I learned a long time ago, though, that you should never judge a book by its cover. Especially not one that has earned the seal of approval from sage minds of staff from the likes of Harvard, Yale, and Princeton – those folks tend to know what they are talking about!

Teetering on the thin line between “mid” and “low” major, the Big Red received virtually no respect entering the tournament. As a member of the Ivy League, a conference known more for its prowess in the classroom than on the hardwood, Cornell cruised through their regular season to a 27-4 record en route to their conference championship. For all their effort, they were slotted in as a 12-seed in the 2010 tournament and were slated to face Temple (ranked 12th in the nation) during their first-round matchup.

The fact that Cornell was the nation’s best team from beyond the three-point arc got them a little recognition, and they quickly became a “sexy” upset pick against the A-10 champs. Still, most considered the group of “nerdy” Ivy-Leaguers a longshot to upset their much more battle-tested opponents.

At the end of the game, those who did believe Cornell had all the makings of a real tournament contender were repaid with a win, making them look like geniuses worthy of admission into Cornell’s own ivy-walled institution.

But the ride wasn’t over yet. Cornell could enjoy the reward for their stunning first-round victory only briefly, because a REAL test was looming on the horizon. Cornell would next face their first “power conference” foe, the fourth-seeded Wisconsin Badgers out of the Big Ten.

Wisconsin had already beaten several top-ten teams this season (Duke, Ohio State, Purdue, and Michigan State). By comparison Cornell should have been nothing more than a blip on the Badgers’ power conference radar. It seems once again that Cornell had other thoughts in their oversized minds.

When the hour was up and all the pencils were down, it was Cornell who took their more esteemed opposition to task, schooling them in every facet of the game. Wisconsin was out-shot, out-rebounded, and most importantly out-scored by Cornell, allowing more points in this game than they had all season.

The Big Red provided Wisconsin with a Master’s-level education in butt-whoopery (that is an official, Ivy League accredited term), soundly defeating them by a score of 87-69.

Cornell’s tournament play thus far has been nothing short of remarkable. Both their program and the conference that they represent have long suffered when in competition with other Division I programs. As a school, 2010 marks Cornell’s third consecutive appearance in the NCAA Tournament. It is only the fifth overall tournament appearance in the entire history of the school, with two other one-and-done appearances in 1954 and 1988. As far as the conference is concerned, the last time an Ivy League school won even a single tournament game was in 1998 when Princeton defeated UNLV.

Now Cornell is the first Ivy League member since 1979 to survive the first weekend of the NCAA Basketball Tournament. Whether they win or lose against the top-seeded Kentucky Wildcats on Thursday night during their Sweet Sixteen matchup, the Big Red have already proven to be biggest winners in a tournament loaded with mid-major magic!

My Zimbio Blog Directory Sport Blogs - BlogCatalog Blog Directory
Add us to your technorati favorites Digg! Bookmark and Share

Leave a Comment » | The 2010 Best Sweet 16 Story Debate | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by Bleacher Fan

The 2010 Hardest NCAAB Region Debate… A Midwest Nightmare

March 19, 2010

Read the opposing arguments from Loyal Homer and Sports Geek.

What did I tell you?! The March Madness tournament this year will be a) one of the most competitive we have ever seen, and b) LOADED with upset potential.

Day One did not disappoint! Congratulations to Old Dominion, Murray State, Ohio, Washington, and St. Mary’s for pulling off very exciting (and very entertaining) upsets yesterday, and for screwing up a lot of brackets around the country!

Speaking of screw-ups, the Big East had a TERRIBLE showing yesterday. In four games during the first day of competition, the Big East was LUCKY to finish at 1-3, with Notre Dame, Marquette, and Georgetown on the losing end of MAJOR upsets while Villanova was fortunate to escape with their tournament lives in order to avoid a sweep!

Now that the alleged depth of the Big East has once again been exposed for what it really is – overblown hype from having too many teams in the conference – we can move forward and take a look at which region is shaping up to be the toughest of the tournament.

Even with the early departure of the Georgetown Hoyas at the hands of a “lowly” mid-major MAC team (in case you haven’t learned yet, I am a supporter of the mid-major programs), the toughest region of the tournament is the Midwest.

To start with, the Midwest Region features the Kansas Jayhawks, who entered the tournament as the top team in the country. That fact alone means that 15 out of the 16 teams in that region would have go through the best team in the country just make it out of the region and into the Final Four!

Beyond the strength of the top seed in this region the Midwest is stocked with some of the strongest teams in the tournament.

Sitting opposite Kansas in the bracket is the Ohio State Buckeyes, who are led by the favorite for the NCAA Player of the Year award, Evan Turner. The Buckeyes, fresh off of claiming the Big Ten championship, were among the teams being tossed around as possible one seeds for the tournament, and have been playing some of the best basketball in the country over the last two months of the season.

Traveling further down the region, the road doesn’t get any easier. Sitting in the fourth position in the region is the second place team out of the ACC – Maryland. In a year where the overall performance of the ACC has been down, Maryland has been one of the two teams within that conference that still played exceptionally well this season, even defeating Duke earlier this month.

After Maryland comes fifth-seeded Michigan State. Although the Spartans struggled against many of the highly ranked teams they faced throughout the 2010 season, they are led by arguably the greatest tournament coach of the last decade in Tom Izzo (Editor’s note: Stay tuned next week for that debate). Under Izzo’s leadership the Spartans are now entering their THIRTEENTH consecutive NCAA appearance. During that run of thirteen straight NCAA Tournament berths, Izzo has reached the Sweet Sixteen EIGHT different times, has been to the Elite Eight SIX times, has FIVE different Final Four appearances, and has been to the championship game twice (WINNING the title in 2000)! If anyone knows how to “dance” it is Izzo.

If that is not tough enough, consider that some of the double-digit seeds in this region are capable of some very impressive feats! Entering the region as the ten seed, Georgia Tech showed during the ACC Tournament that they are capable of playing with and beating many of the top teams in the nation (including a victory over the aforementioned Maryland Terrapins). Then at 14 sits the Ohio Bobcats who already have proven they will run with anybody after they SMOKED Georgetown on Thursday by a score of 97-83.

We learned yesterday that there is no such thing as a free ride in the NCAA Tournament for 2010, and in no region is that more evident than in the Midwest. From top to bottom, the strongest caliber of teams at each level are represented in this corner of the bracket, and the team that ultimately does emerge victorious from this gauntlet will have tested and proven their mettle against the very best that March Madness has to offer!

My Zimbio Blog Directory Sport Blogs - BlogCatalog Blog Directory
Add us to your technorati favorites Digg! Bookmark and Share

4 Comments | The 2010 Hardest NCAAB Region Debate | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by Bleacher Fan

« Previous Entries
Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.