Two topics: Ethics of Conference Tournaments, and TOO MANY timeouts!
Conference Tournaments:
Are they exploitative of the athletes? Potentially 4 games in four days right in the middle of the term. Of course the athletes are "exploited" to an extent, though the return of a free college education is the other side of an argument that has been gone over. I just think the conference tournaments are a big money grab for the schools and the networks. I don't see how there's any other way to see it. Yeah, these kids are sled dogs and if you ask them to pull, they'll pull. But wow. It's entertainment for us, and I don't see how it benefits the players who have already been at this for months. Sure, some teams can get hot and get in. What was the season for?
It's even worse for the smaller conferences. My local college team plays in a very minor D1 conference. In almost every year, except one or two over the last 15, the only team that makes the NCAA is the tournament champion, thereby relegating the regular season meaningless. This year the team that dominated the conference all year was upset in their tournament. Season over. Injustice.
Now, the timeouts. It is covered also in a topic down on mglicious below, but I think there is a wider council in the forum so I revisit it.
I went to see said local college team play a few times this season. They are mediocre, struggle badly for attendance, and are unable to put on much of a show during the constant and long timeout breaks. You almost pray for a non-close game because you know there are going to be 8 to 10 timeouts in the last three minutes alone. A timeout is a painful development. You find yourself rolling your eyes and contemplating leaving no matter how good the game is. Basketball is about flow, build-up, back and forth, a rising crescendo of emotion. The timeouts kill it.
It happens in football too, to an extent. Do we wonder why even a powerhouse like Michigan cannot get students to their football games. Its becoming a TV show, on a huge HD set, with cheap beer in the fridge, for FREE. Play the fucking games. Let real be real.
March 14th, 2014 at 12:17 AM ^
You know what you're getting into when you sign up to play college basketball. Some conferences have been playing these tournaments for 50 years.
March 14th, 2014 at 12:21 AM ^
How long has the Big 10 been doing it? 20 years maybe?
March 14th, 2014 at 12:22 AM ^
March 14th, 2014 at 12:45 AM ^
The first B1G tournament was in 1998. Michigan won it, but those games have been vacated.
March 14th, 2014 at 11:16 AM ^
The ACC basketball tournament has been taking place since 1954. In the days when only one team from a conference could make the NCAA tournament, the ACC tourney champ was the team that went to the NCAA's.
March 14th, 2014 at 12:23 AM ^
In regards to the first topic..
As a former athlete, I can assure you that the strong majority of these kids want to play post season tournaments, as many games as possible, and would play more games if they could. Most these kids just love to play.
They don't see it as big revenue, potential risk to their bodies, etc. They see it as a chance to go out and compete and win. The people that stir up contoversery about this stuff are on the fringe. Just my opinion.
March 14th, 2014 at 12:23 AM ^
March 14th, 2014 at 12:39 AM ^
The ACC has had a tournament since 1954. The SEC has had a tournament since 1979.
March 14th, 2014 at 12:43 AM ^
"This is the way they always did it" (bullshit).
"Sic 'em boy" (exactly, until Nick Saban cancels your scholarship).
Title IX? That might be a taking off point.
March 14th, 2014 at 12:47 AM ^
Trust me, I'm not on some bleeding heart witch hunt. The thing that I hate about conference tourneys is when they completely obliterate the meaning of the regular season because ESPN says "jump, bitches."
of the ACC tournament? It predates ESPN by 25 years. It was used to determine their conference champion for decades when they only got one team into the NCAA. While you may not like that system, you're way too dismissive of the reasons other people do.
Fair point, but even if it pre-dates the cable-sports era it still does not make sense to me that you play a whole season to determine a league champion, give them a trophy, and then tell them they have to win 3 or 4 games in 4 days in order to go for the golden ring. The whole season becomes meaningless.
It's from their tournament. There is no regular season trophy or title. Despite that, I don't think anyone has considered their regular season meaningless.
March 14th, 2014 at 12:08 PM ^
They credit a team with the regular season title but they don't give a trophy for it.
It's more like, teams take credit for the regular season title by hoisting a banner. When you look at the ACC web page that lists championships won, the regular season winner is nowhere to be found.
I don't think those teams play all season just to get into the NCAAs. They're mostly just going to get beaten, perhaps very badly, in the first game. Winning regular conference titles is a goal in itself. In a way, their conference tournament for them is like the early rounds of the NCAAs for major conference teams.
The SEC also played in tourny games in 1933 before going on a hiatus until 1979. They made those poor kids play 3/4 basketball games for decades.
Iona? Robert Morris? Green Bay?
Oh, I've upvoted you, by the way. I see your point. I get other people saying "get over it", because there's jack shit we can do. And so people will tell you you're a conspiracy theorist and a cry-baby, and out of touch, but I get it. Your last sentence says it well and sums up your point: Just play the damn game(s) already. I get it. It's ridiculous how we've had to sit though and watch our "beloved college athletics" become a money pit and we've been left with nothing to do about it, but watch and continue to support it/them because we love them that much (hence the reason why "smart people" finally realized this and decided to make some $$$ off of that notion). Not that there's anything wrong with making money off of college sports, I mean this blog has people writing about......wait, I'm getting off track. Anyway, I'm at least half-way with you, if not more...I get it, it is pretty Re-dic when we sit back and watch and really focus on the way it's all changed due to the all-mighty dollar.
March 14th, 2014 at 10:25 AM ^
Yes, nuance, thank you. You've captured the love/hate dichotomy of what is happening to college sports. If you want to look at it as, the D1 football and basketball players are bringing money to their schools so that girls who play field hockey can get scholarships, then maybe we can view this differently. I brought all this up because I was watching "Fab Five" the other night and Jalen Rose has some pretty compelling arguments on this.
is that it makes a mockery of the assertions by the football powers that a post-season playoff would "take the kids away from their studies too much" or some such argle-bargle.
Ha, totally.
Most of those football anti-playoff arguments are such B.S. Just wait until this 4 team thing get's going and they see that they won't be losing any money and if anything get more. That 4 will be 8 in no time.
I remember hearing the Grand Valley FB coach on a radio show stating flat out that playoffs were not any burden on his teams and didn't see any reason why BCS/D-1 couldn't make it work.
March 14th, 2014 at 11:22 AM ^
and taking it a step further is the NCAA tourney. If you're a team that's in a Thurs/Sat set up and make it to the Final Four, you're away from school for almost 3 weeks. Even the teams that play a Fri/Sun schedule are away from campus a ton during the tourney.
the TV timeouts ruin sports and make attendance in person less and less fun. The only way it will change is if sports move to direct pay-per-view, which I would actually be fine with.
I like what the NBA does. If you call a timeout, the tv timeout is cancelled, if you don't, most of the time a tv timeout is charged to one of the teams. The problem with NCAA isn't necesserily having a timeout every 4 minutes. It's having a timeout called, then a whistle, then the TV timeout. That's what kills the game.
The NCAA needs to either follow the NBA's lead or greatly reduce the number of team timeouts. I'd propose 6 team timeouts, charging two tv timeouts a half to each team if the requisite number of timeouts haven't been called in the half. Alternatively, if they want to keep the official timeouts, I'd reduce team timeouts to 2 per team. You get one to stop a run if you need to, and one to set up a last second play. Doing all this would reduce repetitive stopages and end the frustration of the last minute of a basketball game taking 10 minutes to complete.
I don't think TV should have a big problem with this. Game time would become more consistent, and TV ends up not using all the timeouts for commercial breaks anyway at the end of the game.
March 14th, 2014 at 11:17 AM ^
During the '80s and '90s, with the exception of Indiana, the Big Ten's best teams consistently underperformed in the NCAA tournament, while the ACC teams usually overperformed.Hmmm, I can think of another Big Ten school that went to five Sweet 16s, three national title games and won a national championship between 1988 and 1994.
March 14th, 2014 at 11:24 AM ^
the same team you're thinking of underperformed quite a bit in the 5-6 years preceeding 1988.
March 14th, 2014 at 12:37 PM ^
Only two years - 1985 and 1986. The '87 team wasn't that good. Prior to '85, we weren't in the tournament (though we did win the NIT title in '84).
There are certainly a lot of soap boxes one could stand on with regards to the NCAA, but I am very surprised you chose this one. I'm not saying your point isn't valid but these kids are opting to play basketball and they know about the conference tourney long before it starts. How would you treat college baseball? They are often playing several games per weekend in the middle/end of spring semester. For instance, Michigan baseball is playing in Charleston this week/weekend. You come off not as a "bleeding heart" (your words) but as more of a whiny bitch...with all due respect.
I don't like that conference tournaments decide the NCAA bid for smaller conferences. The small schools work so hard to get to the NCAAs. That's their national title. Give it to the regular season champion. They earned it more IMO. And theoretically, there'll be more competitive first round games if the better teams from the small schools are advancing. Give the conference tourney champ an NIT bid so there's still some excitement.
But this won't happen because Championship Week has become such a big deal and money maker and if you lessen its value, there's less interest.
"I don't see how there's any other way to see it."
That explains a lot, really. Welcome to a world where it is possible to have a different opinion. And how very altruistic of you to claim that it's all about concern for the poor slaves who toil and suffer for our barbaric pleasure.
March 14th, 2014 at 10:34 AM ^
Louisville won the National Championship last year. Based on your argument the team that was ranked #1 prior to the Tournament wasted their regular season.
Perhaps Florida (or whoever ends up the overall #1) should be given the Regular Season National Champs trophy and the winner of the tournament gets the NCAA Tournament Trophy.
The last place team in a lowly conference could win their tournament and could theoretically become the National Champs. This may be unfair but it also makes "cinderellas" exciting to watch.
March 14th, 2014 at 11:59 AM ^
Louisville was the number 1 overall seed last year.
March 14th, 2014 at 10:41 AM ^
I might be the only person here that doesn't give much of a hoot about the conference tournaments, even the B1G's. It would be nice for Michigan to have a good run as a tune up or even a tournament banner to hang, but it is a very, very distant third to the B1G regular season and the NCAAs. I have passing interest, at best.
March 14th, 2014 at 11:16 AM ^
I might be the only person here that doesn't give much of a hoot about the conference tournaments, even the B1G's.
Actually, I think that's pretty much the consensus here. I don't think too many people care that much about winning this "championship." The more pressing issue is protecting and/or enhancing our seed for the NCAAs.