The networks can’t be happy. Nothing like a 4 seed, two 5’s and a 9 seed to get the blood flowing.
Well, as for TV, San Diego County, Dade County, Palm Beach County, and Connecticut are pretty big TV markets. Also, if it was Duke, Kansas, Kentucky and UNC in the final four, I would have no interest. I like it, and might actually watch the final four games for the first time in many years.
5 Likes
The “blue bloods” can kiss my a$$. Haha
7 Likes
Weirdly, I find myself more interested in Women’s Hoops. The inferior talent in the Men’s bracket due to early entry in the NBA has made the game almost unwatchable and the officiating is also bottom tier.
1 Like
Once you watch a lot of women’s hoops, you really get an appreciation for the sound fundamentals many teams have. You don’t get the alleyoop dunks (which are fairly easy for players who are at or above 6’8") but lots of quality ball movement, teamwork, and hustle.
.
6 Likes
I don’t care who it is. All I’m saying is that the top seeded teams in the tournament should make the final four more often than they do now. It weakens the product when they don’t. We all love a good upset but upsets are the norm now so it doesn’t even feel like an upset anymore.
I love it when the small schools win. Makes for a great tournament. Having Kentucky, Kansas etc in the Final Four is boring.
5 Likes
I just like a good game, couldn’t care less about pure “athleticism”. I’m one of those people who don’t really care about the “atmosphere” of a game – don’t get me wrong, it adds to the game. Watching a good game in silence works just fine to me.
2 Likes
Having all rounds be one game is what creates the upsets. Virtually no way does Princeton make it to the second weekend or even get past Zona if the rounds were best of 7, 5, or even 3.
1 Like
This isn’t about blue-bloods. High seeds can be any team based on various rating systems (sure, a little bias, but mostly NET is used and quadrant records). I mean, SDSU/Creighton game - neither really looked like a final 4 team. Both have some pretty big flaws. But they made it through and kudos to them. Lower seeds getting through is ‘fun’ but I wouldn’t say they are necessarily the 4 best overall teams, just on the days they played the opponents they had. But any given day/game …
But that’s why this is the best tournament in the world.
3 Likes
A “lesser” team might get hot a d get lucky in the tournament, but it still has to have enough to win 5, 6,.or 7 games in a row to climb the mountain.
3 Likes
I’m sorry but a 16 seed beating a 1 seed is just ridiculous and shouldn’t happen. It’s happened twice now in the last few years. Embarrassing.
If by “embarrassing” you mean “great”, then I agree. Things like that happening is what makes this the best sporting event there is.
4 Likes
16 beating a 1 will happen when you have a talent drain in the sport. It’s why I said what I said earlier. Women’s game has the best players. The Men’s game many are jumping to pro or semi-pro leagues instead of school.
Ironic that the format of letting FDU knock off Purdue (lord knows THEIR fanbase must be getting tired of losing every single year to a very low seed) is being criticized here when many of us are excited that FBS football is finally going to open the playoffs up to more than a select few each year.
4 Likes
Don’t care about the “drain”. I watch sports at whatever level they are played. Football, for instance. I’ve watched it from little league (as young as 8 and 9 year olds) all the way to the NFL. It’s about the game, not the talent level. In college, division III is as fun as Power 5.
3 Likes
I’m not saying if it’s great or anything. What made #1 seeds so strong back in the day was there were multiple future NBA players and many who stayed for three years. Now with one-and-done, it allows older teams that have played together for a while to knock off these young teams with super talent. Stronger parity means more #16 beating #1s.
Talent drain or more parity? Basketball has always been a game where a less talented team on paper that worked well together could beat supposedly more talented teams without that cohesive dynamic.
In HS we were a 1A school and I was the tallest player. (I was also the worst player and last guy off the bench but I digress) We had a solid 9 man rotation that played extremely well together. Most of us had played together since elementary school and those top players were fundamentally sound. We beat teams we had no business even competing with on paper.
That dynamic seems to have made it’s way more and more to the tournament in recent years. The committee can really only do so much when evaluating which teams are “better” than others. The seeds are somewhat subjective. The exciting part for many fans is when a team does something the committee doesn’t think is expected. You never really know which teams are going to gel and excel and those who might just collapse under the bright lights and pressure. Those things are what makes this time of year fun.
2 Likes
I think we were posting at the same time. I’m just saying you aren’t having Michael Jordan and James Worthy staying at UNC in modern-day hoops. It helps with the parity when you are not stacked with eight 5* level talent on the roster for multiple years to learn a system.
My problem with it is the basketball talent and play is less than optimal. Very sloppy play. Also, refs have gotten much worse in the past decade.
1 Like