But I'm getting a little jaded about all of this. The reason for this mentality is that, in each passing year, the very reason for why the tournament is as popular as it is slowly drains away.
I guess it actually began in another sport: college football. They announce a playoff, however small, and I react positively. Finally, everyone has a realistic shot at this. Wait...there are 6 bowls involved? Whatever, I don't care, as long...I'm sorry, "Power Conferences" is...what is that?
Well, what it is is the same lesson being told another way: there's a list of schools we care about. The rest? Get bent. Oh, you're undefeated? Don't care. Ok, you can be in one of these 6 bowls, but not the playoff. Hey, at least we let you in here, right?
March Madness was different. Everyone in, and the love flowed. Throughout my youth, seeding (which in the end doesn't matter) was appropriate on an agreed set of circumstances. And every year, you'd get upsets. Duke would lose tournament games in North Carolina and we'd rejoice. Stephen F. Austin and Florida Gulf Coast would wear you down and make it happen. Ohio would just plain beat the shit out of Georgetown. I'd even get in the fun, especially when you'd sense a run (like George Mason) and ride the way in picks. (A team former Pacific Gold writer Dave Blizznewski called Ghetto Magic)
But one time, a tournament started and I didn't make any picks. No one really cared. I just sat back and watched, hoping for upsets which didn't occur. And another year...and another, and since I'm not ensconced in something that I'll foul up anyway, I cast my full gaze to the schools themselves. I recognized nearly all of them, and this is in a day and age where my basketball viewing time is minimal.
A) We have the usual powers.
B) We have the small conference champions.
C) And we have this at-large pool where the committee would much rather have more schools from the A conferences and not the B. Why?
As with many sports-related questions that are answered in opinion and not fact, I'm not told a reason. One new answer I heard this week was "Hey, remember, this is a TV show! You want the big names for big games!" We can agree or disagree with that, and considering my former career and knowledge on the subject, it would be useless to tell another windbag how they got it wrong. It's that the victories of schools from a B conference beating a school from an A conference is WHAT MADE THIS WHOLE THING POPULAR.
The first question people say when discussing the madness is "Who do you have winning the tournament?" - a statement that could cover any sort of athletic competition. The second? "What are your upsets?" The NCAA will tolerate 1, maybe 2...and the rest that aren't upsets really (except in seed) help stir that talk. Those lovable ratings. But when those little old schools don't get to play...it's just another weekend in December with "key match-ups."
I'll be watching, of course. I like basketball, and more importantly, entertaining basketball. Sometimes I can even coax the Big Scoop to join me, even if the topic turns to uniform color. It'll mean nothing to her, but I'll watch and think "you're killing what made this great for no reason other than the whims of a very, very few. I wonder if I'm alone?"
