Now that about a week has passed since the UConn Huskies won The Worst NCAA Basketball Final Ever, I figure I have enough perspective to look back and try to address the question of whether someone who, like me, has been a fan of men's college basketball for almost three decades, should derive any joy from watching their alma mater win a game that basically bombed college basketball back to the Stone Age. Without hesitation, I have to say the answer is unequivocally "Yes." And the reasoning is simple. It's much better to win The Worst NCAA Basketball Final Ever than it is to lose The Worst NCAA Basketball Final Ever. Just ask Butler.
Granted, that doesn't mean that I actually enjoyed watching the game. In fact, as someone who has long appreciated not just March Madness, but also the long slog of the regular season, Monday's re-enactment of Bill Laimbeer's Combat Basketball was a sad and shambolic reminder of just how far the state of men's college basketball has fallen since the introduction of the NBA's "one-and-done rule" in 2005. The merits of "one-and-done"--which states that high school players must be 19-years-old as of the end of the calendar year of the NBA Draft and one year removed from their high school graduation to be eligible for selection--have been debated ad infinitum, but the argument UConn and, especially, Butler made last Monday is almost irrefutable. During the telecast, NBC's usually anodyne Clark Kellogg noted repeatedly that the teams' performances were "inexplicable," but the elephant in the room was that there was, in fact, an obvious explanation for Monday's travesty--over the last couple of years, the quality of college basketball has generally been pretty poor, and it's getting progressively worse. That's why Butler, a team that won ugly throughout the whole tournament, got as far as they did. It's not that the Bulldogs didn't deserve to be there, they probably did (thanks to a truly farcical ending to the Pitt game). And therein lies the problem.
The Rise of the Mediocre Mid-Major
As Charles Barkley opined during Monday's post-game show, this won't be the last time we see schools of Butler's ilk in the Final Four. What he didn't add is that well-coached, veteran teams comprised of NBDL-level talent will soon be able to compete with the traditional powers from the "major" conferences that are still fielding a collection of highly-touted strangers who have been recruited for a one- or two-year layover in college ball. This paradigm shift greatly advantages the mid-majors who don't bother trolling for McDonald's All-Americans with the likes of John Calipari. Rather than take Calipari's day-trading approach of trying to annually restock a program with lottery picks, the mid-majors can take a more conservative, recruit-and-hold approach. The gamble small schools are willing to take is that four years down the road in March, no-names who've played 100 games together will be able to give blue-chippers that have only played 35 a run for their money.
If it Ain't Broke
The problem with this kind of parity is that it's fundamentally regressive. Mid-majors aren't ascending to the major's level of play; instead, the majors are backsliding to mediocrity. The tournament, as a contest, is more competitive, but the quality of the contest itself is suffering. Most people, though, don't really seem to care, as the tournament's record-breaking ratings suggest. Now that March Madness is a cultural meme that has introduced terms like "buzzer beater" and "bracket buster" into the national lexicon, its sheer drama will continue to generate impressive Nielsen ratings. That's why it seems unlikely that there's going to be a big push from the NCAA to undo the one-and-done rule. And I guess that's good news for UConn and Butler, because given the direction college basketball is heading in, this won't The Worst NCAA Basketball Final Ever for too long.
No comments:
Post a Comment