NCAA March Madness 2011

[czvo]

Games like this and throughout the tourney almost make you think about a best out of three game series. Cut the regular games in half and start the tournament earlier with a best out of three. Cut the number of teams in it as well. We all know teams like Butler and VCR, etc, etc, etc, are not of the top 8 eight teams in the country.

What? VCU just ripped through 5 major conference teams. Dominated USC, crushed Georgetown, Purdue, and Kansas. The only close game they had was against FSU.

 

[Bob_The_Cat]

uh yeah...how about no?

upsets are what make this one of the best sports events of the year. your suggestion is just awful.

yeah...and you'd have to cut the tournament to about 322 teams or less to actually be able to do something like that in the same time frame.

 

[Rist77]

If the Cavs draft a Morris I might stab myself.

 

[3 Da Hard Way]

Shaka getting paid by someone

 

[DougHeil]

uh yeah...how about no?

upsets are what make this one of the best sports events of the year. your suggestion is just awful.

I did say "almost make you think". Read before you write.

That said, I personally don't like seeing teams like VCU in the final four. Sorry, I do not. It doesn't seem right. If VCU and Kansas played ten games, Kansas may win 9 of them. At least 8. That's what I mean. Even if you do the tourney as a one and out until the elite 8, and then do 4 series of best out of three, you would get a true champion. It would still be damn exciting with the underdogs possibly winning 2 games of the 3. The chances of seeing the absolute best team go to the final four would be greater however.

Butler vs. VCR Sorry, but that's just bad IMO. One of those teams is now assured of being in the title game.

The splitting up of teams in each region was very bad this year as well. Just bad, bad.

If Kentucky wins, there will be no #1 or #2 seeds in the final four.

 

[NarlCavs]

I think it's great that teams like Butler and VCU get to the final 4. That's what makes the tournament so great.

Also would be nice if this might make the committee in the future choose a 2nd or 3rd place team from a mid major or the regular season champ if they happen to lose in their conference tourney over a team that for example goes 19-14 and has a .500 record in a major conference. Especially when those teams in the major conferences have the huge advantage of getting to play 3/4 or more of their non conference schedule on their home court.

All the advantages go to the big conference schools. There's no need to give them even more advantages.

 

[3 Da Hard Way]

vcu & butler in the final 4

 

[czvo]

But we can't act like this happens every year. Its very rare for something like this to happen.

And I gotta disagree with it being bad. Maybe bad for ratings, ticket sales, etc. But it just shows you that the best teams come to play and find a way to win. Kansas didn't come to play, and in the biggest game of the year, their flaws reared their ugly heads (stated in an earlier post). Butler and VCU making the Final Four? Flat out awesome.

 

[bushwick_bill]

Games like this and throughout the tourney almost make you think about a best out of three game series. Cut the regular games in half and start the tournament earlier with a best out of three. Cut the number of teams in it as well. We all know teams like Butler and VCR, etc, etc, etc, are not of the top 8 eight teams in the country.

One of the worst ideas I have read in a while regarding sports...

 

[czvo]

Games like this and throughout the tourney almost make you think about a best out of three game series. Cut the regular games in half and start the tournament earlier with a best out of three. Cut the number of teams in it as well. We all know teams like Butler and VCR, etc, etc, etc, are not of the top 8 eight teams in the country.

Here's the main problem with this idea. This isn't the NBA where every team plays a set number of games and plays every other team at least twice. In the NBA, we have a pretty good idea of who the best teams are come playoff time. However, college teams play anywhere from 31-35 games in the regular season AND they play a small % of teams in the country. There is no way of determining who the best teams are come tourney time, and, as evidenced by this season, sometimes teams people don't think should make it really are deserving.

Cutting the number of games in half (so teams are playing about 15) would require that MORE teams make the tournament. If you decrease the # of teams in the tournament, then you are relying on biased media members (because lets be honest, its impossible to watch every team an equal number of games. That leads to inaccurate assumptions being made) to tell you who the best teams are. Did Kansas have a better regular season than VCU? Yes. Does that mean they are a better team? No. Likewise, saying Kansas would beat VCU 9 times out of 10 is not a fair statement. VCU crushed Kansas today. The game was close once, and VCU shut the door as soon as Kansas got within 4. After watching it, I don't know if Kansas would beat VCU 5 times out of 10, let alone 9 times.

People only say teams like Butler and VCU shouldn't make it because they don't see them and their highlights aren't on Sportscenter. The fact of the matter is those two teams might be playing the best basketball of the tournament (VCU definitely is). They definitely deserve to be in the Final Four, and it will be great to see that game.

 

[bushwick_bill]

Here's the main problem with this idea. This isn't the NBA where every team plays a set number of games and plays every other team at least twice. In the NBA, we have a pretty good idea of who the best teams are come playoff time. However, college teams play anywhere from 31-35 games in the regular season AND they play a small % of teams in the country. There is no way of determining who the best teams are come tourney time, and, as evidenced by this season, sometimes teams people don't think should make it really are deserving.

Cutting the number of games in half (so teams are playing about 15) would require that MORE teams make the tournament. If you decrease the # of teams in the tournament, then you are relying on biased media members (because lets be honest, its impossible to watch every team an equal number of games. That leads to inaccurate assumptions being made) to tell you who the best teams are. Did Kansas have a better regular season than VCU? Yes. Does that mean they are a better team? No. Likewise, saying Kansas would beat VCU 9 times out of 10 is not a fair statement. VCU crushed Kansas today. The game was close once, and VCU shut the door as soon as Kansas got within 4. After watching it, I don't know if Kansas would beat VCU 5 times out of 10, let alone 9 times.

People only say teams like Butler and VCU shouldn't make it because they don't see them and their highlights aren't on Sportscenter. The fact of the matter is those two teams might be playing the best basketball of the tournament (VCU definitely is). They definitely deserve to be in the Final Four, and it will be great to see that game.

Butler has made the final four two years in a row, that says something about this team being one of the best in the country...

 

[czvo]

Butler has made the final four two years in a row, that says something about this team being one of the best in the country...

Exactly. And it really bugs me when people say they're not that good. Sure, they don't have a lot of NBA players (though I think Shelvin Mack will be incredibly solid in the pros), but they run their system, and they defend like crazy. As a team, they are damn good.

 

[DougHeil]

Exactly. And it really bugs me when people say they're not that good. Sure, they don't have a lot of NBA players (though I think Shelvin Mack will be incredibly solid in the pros), but they run their system, and they defend like crazy. As a team, they are damn good.

They aren't that good. Being bugged a bit more.

How's Heyward going to work out in the NBA? Ask me now and I'd say not too well. Really don't know yet though.

I simply don't like the VCU's and the Butler didit's in the final four. Just don't. I may be the only person in the country who feels this way, but I feel this way. You wouldn't have to cut many regular season games either if you started the best out of three series at the Elte 8 point of the tourney. I want the best teams in the title game. We won't get that now. Doing the best of three games and you get a better judge of the best. If VCU is the better team, they beat Kansas two out of three, right?

 

[czvo]

They aren't that good. Being bugged a bit more.

How's Heyward going to work out in the NBA? Ask me now and I'd say not too well. Really don't know yet though.

I simply don't like the VCU's and the Butler didit's in the final four. Just don't. I may be the only person in the country who feels this way, but I feel this way. You wouldn't have to cut many regular season games either if you started the best out of three series at the Elte 8 point of the tourney. I want the best teams in the title game. We won't get that now. Doing the best of three games and you get a better judge of the best. If VCU is the better team, they beat Kansas two out of three, right?

The best teams come to play in the biggest games of the year. If Kansas had lost on some fluke of a shot, then I'd understand the argument. But they didn't show up, and a lot of that had to do with VCU flat out outplaying them.

 

[Bob_The_Cat]

Here's the main problem with this idea. This isn't the NBA where every team plays a set number of games and plays every other team at least twice. In the NBA, we have a pretty good idea of who the best teams are come playoff time. However, college teams play anywhere from 31-35 games in the regular season AND they play a small % of teams in the country. There is no way of determining who the best teams are come tourney time, and, as evidenced by this season, sometimes teams people don't think should make it really are deserving.

Cutting the number of games in half (so teams are playing about 15) would require that MORE teams make the tournament. If you decrease the # of teams in the tournament, then you are relying on biased media members (because lets be honest, its impossible to watch every team an equal number of games. That leads to inaccurate assumptions being made) to tell you who the best teams are. Did Kansas have a better regular season than VCU? Yes. Does that mean they are a better team? No. Likewise, saying Kansas would beat VCU 9 times out of 10 is not a fair statement. VCU crushed Kansas today. The game was close once, and VCU shut the door as soon as Kansas got within 4. After watching it, I don't know if Kansas would beat VCU 5 times out of 10, let alone 9 times.

People only say teams like Butler and VCU shouldn't make it because they don't see them and their highlights aren't on Sportscenter. The fact of the matter is those two teams might be playing the best basketball of the tournament (VCU definitely is). They definitely deserve to be in the Final Four, and it will be great to see that game.

Plus, think about the effect it would have of cutting the length of the season that drastically. Butler struggled early on but caught fire in the second half of the season. UNC was struggling early as well. There's a lot of teams that made the tourney that wouldn't have gotten in had the season ended after the 15th game.

For people to say Butler or VCU don't deserve to be there is ridiculous. They've had to face tougher roads and beat higher seeds than Florida, Duke, Kansas, OSU, etc. had laid out in front of them. If anything I would have to say they've proven that they belong. I mean Butler was literally inches away from winning a national title last year. Now they are back in the Final 4 after losing their best player who was an NBA lottery pick. How many big six conference teams do that, let alone mid-majors? It's remarkable what they've accomplished already.