This blog is not intended as a stand-alone scribble recounting the highlights and lowlights of the Big Dance's second week. Instead, it's a direct sequel to last week's blog, wherein biases against mid-majors, small schools, and Far West schools were discussed. It concerned the officiating: the general policy and game-specific calls and non-calls. It concerned the potential benefactors of such officiating: the television networks, the sponsors-advertisers, the NCAA, and the tournament's largest fan bases, not to mention the East Coast-based sports media monolith.
Admittedly, I watched little of the second weekend games. I preferred the drama of the Tiger Woods triumph at the Arnold Palmer Invitational for sports viewing time. However, I heard how Las Vegas was pleased with the outcomes. Kentucky, the favorite, returns to the Final Four. Ohio State, another favorite, returns for the third weekend. Kansas, a huge legacy program, is no surprise. Louisville, with its wiley, hardened coach Rick Pitino, is the "underdog." The bookies are not displeased. Does this mean big-time gambling meccas have influence over the games' outcomes? Could it involve players being "off" their games as well as the officiating? I don't know, but I'm just saying. . . .
Back to golf: Tiger so crushed the opposition on Sunday that the biggest drama was host/legend Arnold Palmer's sudden blood pressure issue which sent him to the hospital before the trophy presentation on the 18th green. Fortunately, the King recovered and was released the next day from an Orlando hospital. Could it be that Mr. Palmer was staging his own protest of Mr. Woods' lifestyle, divorce, and victory at his own tournament? I don't know, but I'm just saying. . . .
Monday, March 26, 2012
Monday, March 19, 2012
NCAA March Madness Week One: Will a Football Playoff System Really Kill the Conspiracy Talk?
First, let's admit the obvious: power conference teams with name recognition and large fan bases have built-in advantages in the NCAA, both in the regular season and in the postseason. Just look at the BCS football bowls for proof. A non-power conference team has to go undefeated in order to gain a BCS bowl bid. Injustice? Discrimination? The television networks, bowl committees, BCS, and the NCAA deny it. They do encourage teams like Boise State to schedule tougher competition, overlooking how difficult it is for those teams to actually schedule football powerhouses in home-and-home equitable fashion.
Second, let's examine the subtleties: power conference teams with name recognition and large fan bases have built-in advantages even in sports that do have postseason playoff systems. Just look at this year's first weekend of March Madness for proof.
The big school bias permeates everything from officiating to broadcasting. The biased officiating doesn't just mean blatantly bad calls and noncalls favoring the big teams, such as was witnessed in the UNC-Asheville/Syracuse game. The more damaging officiating has to do with the prevailing general policy. It's apparent the policy is "let them play," transforming many match-ups and rebounding tussles into WWE battles. While that policy can backfire on rare occasion, such as in the North Carolina/Creighton game where the high-profile team got beaten up and lost a key starter to a broken wrist, usually the policy favors teams with larger, stronger players and a deeper bench.
The belligerent and grandstanding style of NCAA play almost makes one wish for the good old days of humility and sound fundamentals when the dunk was banned. But I digress. Did the "let them play" policy doom all smaller schools in the Big Dance? Of course not. It just meant the teams had to win by 14 in order to win on the scoreboard by two. Specifically, it meant Xavier had to win by 16 in order to win by four on the scoreboard over Notre Dame. It meant Lehigh had to win by 17 in order to win by five on the scoreboard over Duke. It meant Norfolk State had to win by 14 in order to win on the scoreboard by two over Missouri. It meant Ohio U. had to win by 17 in order to win by five on the scoreboard over Michigan. It meant Creighton had to win by 13 in order to win by one on the scoreboard over Alabama.
Conversely, it meant BYU only lost by eight to Marquette when the scoreboard read a loss by 20. It meant New Mexico State only lost by one to Indiana when the scoreboard read a loss by 13. It meant Montana only lost by 12 to Wisconsin when the scoreboard read a loss by 24. It meant San Diego State only lost by two to North Carolina State when the scoreboard read a loss by 14. It meant Belmont only lost by three to Georgetown when the scoreboard read a loss by 15.
Worse, the dozen-point advantage given to power conference schools over smaller schools through the officiating policy or specific calls/noncalls resulted in several changed game outcomes. Instead of winning by five, UNC-Asheville lost to Syracuse by seven. Instead of winning by three, Harvard lost to Vanderbilt by nine. Instead of winning by nine, St. Bonaventure lost to Florida State by three. Instead of winning by nine, Saint Mary's lost to Purdue by three. Instead of winning by five, Davidson lost to Louisville by seven. Instead of winning by four, South Dakota State lost to Baylor by eight. Instead of winning by eight, UNLV lost to Colorado by four. And that's just the first round.
In all games, the national broadcasting teams always identifies with the power conference schools, whether by individual initiative or pregame production meeting directive. Does broadcasting bias affect outcomes? First, officiating crews need not worry about criticism from the announcers, so they can continue unbalanced calls in favor of the power conference teams. Second, the subtle biases help the larger fan bases of the power conference schools grow larger through the "us vs. them" perspective. Most impressionable are the younger viewers, some of whom are potential recruits latching onto hardcourt superheroes and superteams. Hence, the rich get richer.
You say the networks love a Cinderella or two, like Butler and Virginia Commonwealth in the recent past? Yes, they do. However, that doesn't change the general policy which favors the leviathans to advance. The networks and advertisers can handle a Cinderella or two. They can afford to lose a Duke every now and then. They cannot afford to lose ten Dukes every year. That would dilute the drama, making Cinderellas commonplace and power conference representation spotty. Simply put, power conference teams without dramatic storylines draw more eyeballs than Cinderellas with Spielbergian dramatics.
As bad as the bias against smaller schools is in collegiate athletics, there is also the prevailing bias against western schools, whether they belong to mid-majors or power conferences. Again, the bias emanates from the national media and from the NCAA. The anti-West bias includes not only Hawaiian, Alaskan, Pacific, and Mountain time zone schools, but also the power conference Big 12 schools. Why? Although those Big 12 schools are in the Central time zone, they are west of the Mississippi. Proof of bias? Big 12 tourney champ and #3 in the polls Missouri did not receive a #1 seed. The NCAA committee gave #1 seeds to the ACC, Big East, Big Ten, and SEC champions of the regular season or conference tournament. Surprise!
All year long, the national media (headquartered in New York or Connecticut) kept saying the West was weak in hoops. Yes, the Pac-12 had a down year. Did it really mean they deserved only two teams in the 68-team field while the Big East had 10 of their 16 teams qualify? No. The Mountain West deserved four spots and the WCC deserved three.
Poor and biased officiating was especially pronounced against smaller schools from the West. New Mexico State of tiny Las Cruces had a snail's eyeball of a chance against tradition-rich Indiana. Even after a miraculous record-setting comeback against Iona in the First Four game, BYU had a snowball's chance in hell of getting by Marquette in the next round. They didn't. Saint Mary's was better than Purdue, but the officiating took care of the talent advantage by implementing the power-conference advantage of the Boilermakers.
Watching Gonzaga lose to Ohio State was an exercise in futility and masochism if one was a fan of small schools and schools from the West. Sure, the Zags missed key shots from the perimeter and more than a couple free throws, but the officiating did not help matters. On the scoreboard, Gonzaga lost by seven. Broadcasters lauded the Buckeye defense. To the casual observer, it looked more like a mugging.
Should there be a full playoff system in Division One football? Undoubtedly. Just don't expect such a system to eliminate all biases and injustice. To the NCAA, a level playing field or hardcourt only exists in the movies, books, or Fantasyland.
Second, let's examine the subtleties: power conference teams with name recognition and large fan bases have built-in advantages even in sports that do have postseason playoff systems. Just look at this year's first weekend of March Madness for proof.
The big school bias permeates everything from officiating to broadcasting. The biased officiating doesn't just mean blatantly bad calls and noncalls favoring the big teams, such as was witnessed in the UNC-Asheville/Syracuse game. The more damaging officiating has to do with the prevailing general policy. It's apparent the policy is "let them play," transforming many match-ups and rebounding tussles into WWE battles. While that policy can backfire on rare occasion, such as in the North Carolina/Creighton game where the high-profile team got beaten up and lost a key starter to a broken wrist, usually the policy favors teams with larger, stronger players and a deeper bench.
The belligerent and grandstanding style of NCAA play almost makes one wish for the good old days of humility and sound fundamentals when the dunk was banned. But I digress. Did the "let them play" policy doom all smaller schools in the Big Dance? Of course not. It just meant the teams had to win by 14 in order to win on the scoreboard by two. Specifically, it meant Xavier had to win by 16 in order to win by four on the scoreboard over Notre Dame. It meant Lehigh had to win by 17 in order to win by five on the scoreboard over Duke. It meant Norfolk State had to win by 14 in order to win on the scoreboard by two over Missouri. It meant Ohio U. had to win by 17 in order to win by five on the scoreboard over Michigan. It meant Creighton had to win by 13 in order to win by one on the scoreboard over Alabama.
Conversely, it meant BYU only lost by eight to Marquette when the scoreboard read a loss by 20. It meant New Mexico State only lost by one to Indiana when the scoreboard read a loss by 13. It meant Montana only lost by 12 to Wisconsin when the scoreboard read a loss by 24. It meant San Diego State only lost by two to North Carolina State when the scoreboard read a loss by 14. It meant Belmont only lost by three to Georgetown when the scoreboard read a loss by 15.
Worse, the dozen-point advantage given to power conference schools over smaller schools through the officiating policy or specific calls/noncalls resulted in several changed game outcomes. Instead of winning by five, UNC-Asheville lost to Syracuse by seven. Instead of winning by three, Harvard lost to Vanderbilt by nine. Instead of winning by nine, St. Bonaventure lost to Florida State by three. Instead of winning by nine, Saint Mary's lost to Purdue by three. Instead of winning by five, Davidson lost to Louisville by seven. Instead of winning by four, South Dakota State lost to Baylor by eight. Instead of winning by eight, UNLV lost to Colorado by four. And that's just the first round.
In all games, the national broadcasting teams always identifies with the power conference schools, whether by individual initiative or pregame production meeting directive. Does broadcasting bias affect outcomes? First, officiating crews need not worry about criticism from the announcers, so they can continue unbalanced calls in favor of the power conference teams. Second, the subtle biases help the larger fan bases of the power conference schools grow larger through the "us vs. them" perspective. Most impressionable are the younger viewers, some of whom are potential recruits latching onto hardcourt superheroes and superteams. Hence, the rich get richer.
You say the networks love a Cinderella or two, like Butler and Virginia Commonwealth in the recent past? Yes, they do. However, that doesn't change the general policy which favors the leviathans to advance. The networks and advertisers can handle a Cinderella or two. They can afford to lose a Duke every now and then. They cannot afford to lose ten Dukes every year. That would dilute the drama, making Cinderellas commonplace and power conference representation spotty. Simply put, power conference teams without dramatic storylines draw more eyeballs than Cinderellas with Spielbergian dramatics.
As bad as the bias against smaller schools is in collegiate athletics, there is also the prevailing bias against western schools, whether they belong to mid-majors or power conferences. Again, the bias emanates from the national media and from the NCAA. The anti-West bias includes not only Hawaiian, Alaskan, Pacific, and Mountain time zone schools, but also the power conference Big 12 schools. Why? Although those Big 12 schools are in the Central time zone, they are west of the Mississippi. Proof of bias? Big 12 tourney champ and #3 in the polls Missouri did not receive a #1 seed. The NCAA committee gave #1 seeds to the ACC, Big East, Big Ten, and SEC champions of the regular season or conference tournament. Surprise!
All year long, the national media (headquartered in New York or Connecticut) kept saying the West was weak in hoops. Yes, the Pac-12 had a down year. Did it really mean they deserved only two teams in the 68-team field while the Big East had 10 of their 16 teams qualify? No. The Mountain West deserved four spots and the WCC deserved three.
Poor and biased officiating was especially pronounced against smaller schools from the West. New Mexico State of tiny Las Cruces had a snail's eyeball of a chance against tradition-rich Indiana. Even after a miraculous record-setting comeback against Iona in the First Four game, BYU had a snowball's chance in hell of getting by Marquette in the next round. They didn't. Saint Mary's was better than Purdue, but the officiating took care of the talent advantage by implementing the power-conference advantage of the Boilermakers.
Watching Gonzaga lose to Ohio State was an exercise in futility and masochism if one was a fan of small schools and schools from the West. Sure, the Zags missed key shots from the perimeter and more than a couple free throws, but the officiating did not help matters. On the scoreboard, Gonzaga lost by seven. Broadcasters lauded the Buckeye defense. To the casual observer, it looked more like a mugging.
Should there be a full playoff system in Division One football? Undoubtedly. Just don't expect such a system to eliminate all biases and injustice. To the NCAA, a level playing field or hardcourt only exists in the movies, books, or Fantasyland.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)