The Ballad of Ricky-Bobby: College Basketball Is Kind Of Good But Also Bad

What March Madness storyline jumps out at you the most after the first two days?

BRIAN: The thing that jumps out to me the most is how bad the Big East
is playing. They went into the tournament with tons of hype. "Oh, the Big East is great, they've got eight teams... so good!" When you think about it, the Big Ten had half of their teams -- five of 11 this year and seven of 11 last year -- and they didn't get the kind of hype the Big East got. Eight teams, sure, is a lot in the conference, but the Big East still consists of crappy teams like DePaul.

I think the fact that Georgetown didn't show up was disappointing. A lot of people picked them to go pretty far and contend in that region. They just got destroyed. It looked really bad.

Another high seed that looked really shaky was Villanova. I actually watched the game live. I don't know where Robert Morris is, but for some reason, Pittsburgh had a bunch of local Robert Morris stories (Ed note: It's located in Pittsburgh). That was actually a really fun game to watch. Still, Villanova was at least top five in the country at one point, but it took them a while to show up against a bad team. As far as the calls Villanova got, I was watching the game on mute, so I couldn't tell if the officiating was that bad. But it didn't stand out or anything.

Another thing to talk about that was surprising in the tournament was how good Duke looked yesterday. Everyone was hyping up how bad they were, and at the same time, how bad their region was and how easy it should have been for them to get to the Final Four. But even still, I think a lot of people picked them to lose early. Though they played a 16-seed, they looked fairly good doing it.

BOBBY: I can't believe Texas blew an eight point overtime lead against Wake Forest. What a funny game. It's the only way it could have played out, too. Everyone's harped on UT and WF being talented but underachieving and mostly maddening all year. It's pretty cool they were able really prove everyone conclusively right in such a drawn out and demonstrative way.

I really hate authoritatively calling for the heads of coaches in most situations (after all, what makes us experts?), but, in extreme cases, I think it's acceptable to do so. I'm wondering if Texas head coach Rick Barnes has entered the 'extreme case' territory. His teams constantly underachieve. He couldn't even get to the second weekend of the tournament with Kevin Durant. And now, blowing at eight point lead in overtime? Jesus. Mack Brown would be rolling in his grave.

Other stuff that stands out, quick hit-style: Georgetown's major suck, the Big East sort of redeeming on Day 2, Solid Day 1/Meh Day 2, how legit the Murray State buzzer beater was (seriously, it's great when games don't end on bullshit 3s)

Oh, also, the Gus Johnson soundboard.

Seriously, though. I'm pretty sure that, like me, you prefer the NBA over college. Why do we even follow this tournament?

BRIAN: The reason I like it is all the upsets, though I wouldn't even consider them too significant of upsets. Especially this year and even in recent years past. It seems like the talent is spread throughout these D-I teams. Of course the Top 25 teams, the major players in the conferences, are gonna get the top talent. But it seems like these small schools are getting coaches that know how to coach, build these programs, and contend in the tournament every year.

I like how these small teams don't have as discplined offenses. They tend to play somewhat sloppy and spread things out more. Then the good teams end up playing down to the smaller team's level. They start playing sloppy themselves. It makes for disjointed basketball,
but at the same time, very entertaining. It also makes for some close games at the end, as seen by day one's numerous overtime games.

I think the talent level is a lot closer in college basketball than it is in college football. The 50th best team in college football is a lot worse than the 50th overall team in college basketball. I'm sure it has something to do with how big of an impact the more physical players make in football.

So why do you follow the tournament? And are you a fan of its potential expansion? I think it'd be really cool if it didn't necessarily expand, but they kind of shifted the bracket somehow in that the winner of the NIT made it into the Sweet 16. How cool would that be? You have 15 teams from the regular tournament -- I have no idea how they would do it -- but somehow the NIT winner could make it into Sweet 16. These bubble teams every year feel like they get slighted, and this would decrease some of the controversy. The team that makes it in doesn't deserve to go to the Final Four, but I think it'd be cool to see them in the Sweet 16.

BOBBY: That idea is insane, and I have no idea how they'd even begin configuring the bracket to accommodate your plan. If the next question is "what it be funny?" The answer is, of course, "yes." Still, I'd prefer regular ol' expansion. It's not a crusade I'm on or anything, but since it seems inevitable, I'm certainly not opposed. It's just going to give us a higher probability of close games, upsets, and the like. Maybe the Top 5 teams in the country have some major talent over the rest of the field, but I don't think there's a huge difference between the 6th ranked team vs. the 70th. It seems like most teams have a chance to win the games they're playing in -- it really all depends on match ups. I just hope expansion leads to more teams from the power conferences making it in. I think it's extremely safe to say that most bubble teams from the BCS conferences could hang with the majority of tourney champs from the smaller schools. And if they can't? Upset! Crazy! White players! Bank 3s!

I follow the tournament for the gambling, occasional close game, to watch the NBA-caliber players, and with hope that the talented teams don't choke and end up eventually playing each other. Seriously, look at today's games. So many double digit seeds playing still. Even if they do win their games, it won't be pretty. I really don't mind small schools, but they have to at least be good to make this work. I miss George Mason, and to a much lesser extent, Davidson. My ideal Elite 8 would be all 1's vs. 2's in the regional finals. I think this makes me a bad sports fan. Eh, whatever. It will be a travesty if Kansas and Kentucky don't play in the finals. A travesty.

Also, I'm rooting for New Mexico because everyone from Iowa irrationally hates Steve Alford, which is just, you know, incredibly foolish and petty. Go Lobos!


BobbyStompy is the assistant editor of Tremendous Upside Potential. He can be reached at stompaberdeen [at] aol.com. Follow him on Twitter @bobbystompy.