For all the talk about parity in college basketball, this year's NCAA tournament seems to be all about the top seeds. Despite superlative efforts from most of the underdogs in the Sweet Sixteen, no team seeded lower than third in its region advanced.
However, my issue is with the fact that all of the number one seeds trailed in their third round games, two of them (North Carolina and Ohio State) by at least 16 points and two of them (Kansas and Florida) to mid-major conference teams, but each seemed to come alive at the end of its game and pull away for a victory.
My question is this: are these efforts (sloppy play at the beginning of games and surges at the end) the result of simple laziness on the part of supremely gifted teams who loaf for the first twenty minutes because they know they have the firepower to make a run, or are they the result of genuine parity between the top seeds and their opponents?
2007-03-23
19:22:11
·
4 answers
·
asked by
dreth
3
in
Sports
➔ Basketball
Brett, the problem with your argument for beating teams with experience and a good system is that it should work both ways, for power teams as well as mid-majors. The top five scorers for the Jayhawks are three sophomores and two freshmen, while the top five for the Salukis are two seniors, two juniors, and a sophomore. That Kansas was still able to win says to me that talent counts for more than experience and playing within a system.
2007-03-24
07:15:31 ·
update #1