Champions?
It’s hard to be happy with this year’s NCAA tournament. It’s true that we had two fantastic underdog stories in Butler and VCU, but they were well and truly overshadowed.
Under normal circumstances, an 8 or even 11 seed making the Final Four would be reason to celebrate the tournament as wildly watchable and intriguing. George Mason’s run in 2006 is a perfect example. This year however, the first year with 68 teams, the tournament seemed overcrowded and the result was underwhelming. Upsets were so prevalent that they were more disappointing that “good” teams couldn’t live to expectations than unexpectedly exciting. We had a perfect contradiction on the opposite sides of the Final Four: two young, dynamic, exciting, clean coaches faced each other as two depressing, corrupt standards squared off in the other game. That the crustiest, NCAA-violation-est of them all got the hardware just makes it worse.
What’s more, all my complaints have nothing to do with the great play that won 67 games. The UConn players’ determination, winning 11 tough games in a row, is both remarkable and laudable – though overshadowed by the cheating coach. VCU had an amazing tournament, it’s really too bad that it allows the NCAA to justify the First Four, which is a travesty. VCU played spectacularly to win 5 games, then was beaten by Butler who laid an egg for the championship, a disappointing lasting memory. The Big East made a huge statement with 11 teams into the tournament, then proved a paper tiger by only getting two into the second weekend.
All in all, this tournament proved that unpredictable did not mean exciting.
