NBA Postseason Outshines March Madness?

I think I have finally figured out the secret that most veteran, or good column writers must live by, that by taking what most likely will be the "minority" opinion on a subject will create the most readership or "buzz", and the one I just read shows that it worked on me.

My Cleveland Plain Dealer sports page on Wednesday, April 18th, included a column by Bill Livingston with the headline "NBA's post season outshines NCAA's." Now, just the headline alone screams WHHHHAAAAT! to me, but I decided rather than outrage, I would give Mr. Livingston the benefit of the doubt and read the entire column thoroughly before flying off the handle. I freely admit that this is a discipline that only has arrive in me as I have gotten older, a few years ago I probably would have been right on the phone demanding a debate on the issue, if you can call it that. I mean c'mon, the NBA post season better than the March Madness, preposterous!! Who is with me!

However, after reading Livingston's column all the way through, carefully to make sure I could digest it completely, I must admit, he made several good points, citing several very good examples such as the "single elimination" format to the NCAA tourney as opposed to the "7-game" elimination format that makes up the seemingly never ending NBA post season. He also included some specific game instances and even touched on some strategic differences between the college and pro game that supported his stance, and quite effectively I might add, but not quite enough to sway me, so I ma going to make my argument, and then I would encourage you to research his column for your self and see who makes their case better.

For starters, Livingston, says the NCAA "single elimination" system encourages parity, while the NBA 7-game format encourages quality. On the surface, or paper where things always look better I would certainly agree, but actual games are not played "on paper", they are played with on courts, with fans, noise and various other distractions that test the talents of the humans playing the games. Livingston says that there are fewer upsets in a 7-game system, than in a "one and done" format, well that isn't exactly hard to see or figure out why, because everything at the start of a single elimination is equal, all zeroes on the scoreboard and for all intents and purposes, it literally is its own "game seven." What this means is this, even the best of the best, had better bring their best each and every night, or they go home, sometimes long before anyone thought they would.

Fewer upsets in a 7-game series, sure, especially in the early and unnecessary early rounds with such stellar match ups looming this year as Dallas/Golden State in the West, and Detroit/Orlando or New Jersey or Washington awaiting us in the East. I said unnecessary because each and every year the NBA 1 versus 8 match ups most always are conversations about who the #1 will most likely play in round two. The #8 team is an afterthought, is usually a team that plays well late, or rebounds from early season doldrums and makes a playoff run, but also usually is a team right around "500" and really has no realistic chance to do much more than steal a game, maybe two to give the league another televised game or two to sell commercials for, and of course the gamblers the same, to wager on.

Livingston makes several other points, but the one I wanted to focus on was the one about officiating. He says that NBA refs are better that NCAA ones as well. His main support of this notion is that NBA officials "interpret" the rules with bias to keep players on the floor, whereas colleges refs will send players to the bench very early at times in key contest by calling what he calls "ticky-tack" fouls. Hmm, I can only assume that he means that by keeping players on floor he means "star" players and that is probably the worst kept secret since God talked to Moses. I mean c'mon, the marquee players of the NBA are the ones that "pay the freight" and keep fans coming back, but isn't funny how even the worst NBA teams seem to strangely be competitive on their home floor? Could it be that officials, and possibly even players themselves keep the "home underdog" in the game long enough to keep fans coming back? You bet it is, because I don't care how great certain players in the league are, no one is going to keep paying hard earned dollars night after night to see an inferior home team.

I think NCAA refs have it right by calling things even right from the opening tip, without seeing jersey colors or national rankings first. They also have to deal with a far greater maturity element, because most people forget as they are watching NCAA action that we are still watching 18, 19, 20 and 21 year olds for the most operating under the intense pressure that has swallowed up most collegiate sports.

Going one step further, if you really want to change things up , have the NCAA go to six personal fouls per player before disqualification, and have the NBA go to five per player. I think this would really ramp up the strategy for coaches in key contests throughout the entire season, would be great for students of the game and armchair coaches, and make every roster decision really count as you never know when you might need the "12th" on the end of the bench to give you significant minutes against perhaps one of the league's premiers players, what better "game within the game drama" could a true fan ask for?

As In said, Livingston did make several good points, I just can't agree with his overall assessment, but after reading mine, search out his column and tell me what you think, I would be interested to know.