Fix College Basketball

That said, I think college rings is fine by and large.

You have major conference showdowns early in the season.

You have bigs playing littles -- and littles stunning bigs; it's years old but Gardner-Webb beating Kentucky is classic.

The only thing that bothers me, though at this point I'm resigned to it, is that few bigs have identities anymore. Just don't know who's on the team from year to year. New stash of kids, rinse and repeat. When's the last time a major contender started 5 seniors or 4 seniors and a junior, etc etc?

Other than that, I think it's an enjoyable product.

 

Not five seniors, but last season's NCAA title game had seven of the 10 starters as juniors or seniors and no freshmen started. Seven of the first and second-team All-Americans were seniors. Two were juniors. Villanova, UNC, Kansas, Michigan State, Virginia and a bunch of others who were in the Top 20 all year were veteran teams.

The thing that's changing is most of the top coaches aren't going for four one-and done recruits and a revolving door every year now. You will see K, Bill Self, Roy Williams, etc are getting four-year guys for stability and taking one or two one-and-dones a year, if that, to work in.

 

That's because Cal beats them on all the one and dones.

 

And you continue to harp on apples when the subject is oranges.

A lot more people votes in Senate elections than in school board elections. But the same process that works in school board elections - most votes wins - also works just fine in Senate elections.

You crack me up with your inability to understand the obvious.

 

Rather watch Red Sox-Yankees on Sunday night in April when I have an early meeting the next day than college baseball. Heck, I'd watch arena football than watch college baseball.

 

College baseball is definitely a niche sport. Inside the niche, however, it is a big deal.
I imagine college hockey is similar. Places like Wisconsin, North Dakota, Boston College, they sell out and go nuts for it. Naturally, 98 percent of the country would rather watch a Jets-Canucks game in the second week of November than watch a minute of college hockey.
In Baton Rouge, Columbia, Starkville and Oxford, the baseball teams regularly outdraw the basketball teams. They also easily outdraw the minor league teams in the Southern League. Obviously, the pros are better on the whole -- even if you could make an argument that the SEC is on par with a minor league team, talent-wise -- but people would rather root for the alma mater or state school instead of the minor league team.

 

I go to watch a local college baseball team and think it is great even though I root for the opposition every time. The field is hard up against the garage for the football stadium and the the right field "stands" are the pedestrian ramp up the side of the garage and a few spots in the garage. It's a great view except for seeing the right field corner. I've seen some great players, talked to family and fans who travelled, and don't pay unless the college is charging for parking.

When I lived somewhere else, I would go to a couple of relatively local minor league teams. There was just something great about being able to decide to go to a game in the afternoon and get great seats for cheap a few minutes before the game. Never mind the cheap concessions (beer).

The cool thing about college baseball and MLB is you can go to just see one player and sometimes teams are stacked. I remember going to my MLB's AAA team play the 92 or 93 Richmond Braves. I think every starter was considered a legitimate prospect. Chipper Jones, Ryan Klesko, Javy Lopez, the CF are just the guys I remember .

 

College baseball is glorified slo pitch. It's awful.

 

What am I not understanding? It was said that college basketball should adopt the college baseball "model," which "works well." The topic is college basketball's popularity. College baseball's model works so well that outside of Starkville, Mississippi, and Columbia, South Carolina, no one gives a rat's ass about it and it isn't even on TV.

 

Wow, this definitely sounds like a model college basketball should adopt. It stands to get sky-high ratings in four pissant southern backwaters.

 

You are right about hockey. It is the biggest college sport here in Boston/New England because it's the only one where all the "name" schools and state schools play each other on a regular basis, and most of all, as I suspect is true of college baseball, it's a sport where many, sometimes most, of the players come from here, too.

 

I can't quite nail down the problem with college basketball that needs fixing.