Reemphasizing the Regular Season

Emphasis on NCAAs is madness

JASON WHITLOCK

I’m sorry. It’s Christmas time for college basketball fans, and I’m the only hoops fan screaming “Bah, humbug.” The whole overemphasis of the NCAA Tournament has me down. I just can’t let it go.

It’s popular to say that college football can be immensely improved by jazzing up the end of the season with a tournament. Well, let me be the first to say that college basketball can be immensely improved by strengthening the ties between the regular season and the postseason.

You follow?

College basketball isn’t perfect. In fact, as each year passes and Dick Vitale and Co. spends more and more time hyping March Madness rather than the regular season, college basketball moves closer to becoming the Jr. NBA circuit. There’s no reason to pay attention until the playoffs.

My take is that there has been too much emphasis placed on the conference tournaments as opposed to the regular season. The regular season has been deemphasized more so by the conference tournaments than they have been by the NCAA tournament.

Mr. Whitlock makes the following statement later in his article that, "Next year it wouldn’t surprise me if a smart coach — Bill Self — rested some of his regulars in the conference tournament. College players are not used to playing three games in three days or four games in four days (as Syracuse did). It’s difficult to recover from that and turn back around and play a talented Missouri Valley foe that has been resting for 12 days." I agree, but for a different set of reasons. I think Bill Self (and every other major conference coach) should rest his players. The conference tournements are a pointless exercise, other than just to have some more basketball. Let's look at Ohio State for example. What's more impressive, a 12-4 regular season conference record or 3-0 conference tournement record (had they won it)?! Next question, which takes more work and effort to accomplish, there by making it the greater accomplishment? Thad said as much himself when he said that he wanted the regular season championship more.

The fact that both UConn and Villinova got No. 1 seeds after being bounced in their opening round tournement games tells me all that I need to know. I'm going to rest my players come conference tournement time. If I'm a mid or small major conference coach and I won my regular season but didn't make the NCAA's because another team managed to get hot and win our tournement, I start pitching a fit and demand changes. The question I immediately ask and continue to ask until things change is, why did we bust our butt's all season and then get screwed because of not winning the confernce tournement?! The next question would be why should I put out any effort in the regular season when the tournement winner is going to determine the automatic bid recipient?!

I agree with Mr. Whitlock's suggestion of tying NCAA seedings to the regular season results more than the tournements. The emphasis should be squarely on the regular season not the conference tournement. If D-IA college football ever gets over their case of crainial rectal inversion and institutes a playoff they could do it right from the get go and use the regular season champs, not the conference championship game winner (except in the case of a large conference regular season tie when there is not a head-to-head game to be a tie breaker).