More evidence that the NBA playoffs are more exciting than March Madness

Better basketball? You've got to be kidding. No one in the NBA has played defense since the '70s. The whole exercise is pathetic.

 

Hey David Stern, how did you come up with a nickname like Zagoshe?

 

And there was the thrilling Nets-Raptors game last night... a game the Nets, up 3-1 with Game 6 at home, didn't really need to win...so they fell behind by 20, rallied to lose by 2 and produced the least exciting 2-point game imaginable.

 

What adjustment was Don Nelson making when his team gave up 17 consecutive points at the end of game 5?
He looked just as clueless as a Horizon League coach trying to milk a lead in the final minutes.
Some great games, as well, in the Detroit, Cleveland and Chicago series. NBA! NBA!

 

The NBA is infinitely better than college.

Part of the excitement with the college game is the single elimination. But nobody can really argue that the games that are played are better. That is just silly.

 

If all the week's playoff games were shoved into a four-day span with start times from noon-10p.m., then they might have something to compare.

 

Psst. They're not playing Heat-Knicks-90s basketball in the NBA anymore.

That argument is about as relevant as saying baseball sucks because the ball is dead. Yeah, it was . . . in 1917.

NCAA has the advantage of single elimination, which comes back to bite them in the butt sometimes when a really good team happens to have a bad day . . . and then the "Cinderella" that beat them gets its ass kicked as the fans are deprived of a better matchup (on paper) in the later rounds.

NCAA has interesting stories like N.C. State and Villanova, but it also has dubious champions . . . like N.C. State and Villanova.

I liked the NCAA a lot better before all the good players went pro early. Now you rarely get to "know" any team. And in my book, knowing the players counts for something. What Seinfeld said really applies to college basketball: you're just rooting for laundry.

 

I'm sure those N.C. State and Villanova teams would not have won a best-of-seven series for the championship, but calling them "dubious" champions is a stretch. They both were the only team to win six games under the existing format.

In the finals, both won fair and square, N.C. State beating a team that had two players go on to become among the NBA's top 50 of all-time, and Villanova shooting the lights out to top a team some were wanting to call one of the best college squads ever.

Totally agree with you, though, on how players going pro early has hurt the college game. In the mid-80s, an ESPN game on Tuesday night in January between Ewing's Hoyas and Mullen's Redmen was an event. Now, all anyone cares about is the tournament.

 

Don't we all just root for laundry, no matter the sport?

 

How, exactly, did George Mason making the Final Four take away from it?

 

Because they were a slightly above-average mid-major making a run in a terrible year for the tournament and subsequently got blown out by 30 against the only good team in the field.

This year's NCAAs were excellent and the basketball was much better even though the semifinals and finals weren't filled with last-second dramatics.

 

No defense? Let me tell you about no defense!