When Good Games Go Bad

Article first published as When Good Games Go Bad on Technorati.

There was nothing to be done but watch in disbelief.

After a tournament that had produced some truly thrilling moments — buzzer beaters, comebacks, unlikely upsets — the NCAA championship came down to a couple of teams that could not, for the life of them, buy a bucket.

Okay, so maybe that is a tad unfair. After all, UConn was still able to drain enough baskets in the second half to pull away for the title, but that really is not saying much. It would have taken a great deal of calculated ineptitude to match the utterly awful performance by Butler.

The numbers are staggering, the equivalent of a horror show for basketball coaches: 18.8% shooting from the field, the worst ever in a championship game; outscored in the paint by the unbelievable margin of 26-2; made only one field goal in over thirteen minutes during a particularly unimpressive stretch in the second half. The numbers go on and on, so much fodder for amusing digressions from countless analysts (professional and armchair) who, in all likelihood, would have gladly exchanged their snide remarks for a competitive game.

About the only area where Butler seemed to have any sort of success was in offensive rebounding, which is rather meaningless when the only thing it affords your team is the opportunity to miss more shots. It was as if the Butler rebounders were poor saps at a rigged carnival game, handing over their hard-earned money for another chance at losing.

You had to feel especially bad for Butler coach Brad Stevens; there is no way, when drawing up a game plan, to account for any sort of contingency plan should every one of your players suddenly lose the ability to put the ball in the hoop. One imagines a halftime speech where his only course of action is to draw a crude diagram on the blackboard, illustrating how the ball is supposed to slide smoothly through the circle.

And what to think of all the other eliminated teams that were forced to watch the pathetic display? It would be hard to believe that even benchwarmers on high school teams with losing records weren’t in front of their TV pondering how they could have hit that last open jumper. Perhaps it even gave them a dash of hope that someday they could be on the game’s biggest stage, tossing up bricks like the boys from Butler.

There really is little consolation to offer to Butler. After losing a year ago on a near-miracle half-court missed shot, only to be provided this gift of a second chance, excuses would surely provide nothing more than cold comfort. The beauty and tragedy of sport is that when it comes down, as it often does, to one game deciding everything, absolutely nothing else that you’ve done to that point matters in the slightest. All they can do now is collect themselves and get ready for next year.

Third time’s the charm, right?

Brackets For Dummies

Article first published as March Madness Brackets for Dummies on Technorati.

It’s that time of year again when the familiar disease descends upon us. Rabid college hoops fans recognize the symptoms right away.

1- The burning desire to see young people play basketball
2- The need for said basketball to be played in a tournament structure

Everyone you encounter, The Stricken we will call them, seem programmed to ask the same question.

“How’s the bracket looking?"

As if it were either a part of your anatomy or a newly purchased extravagance. Or perhaps both. They all love to closely scrutinize your March Madness bracket too, condemning what they deem as egregious errors.

“Really?” they’ll ask, pointing to a first-round upset, “You sure about that one? Because if I were you, I might want to take another look.”

Once the games start, though, the same experts that were busy trashing your bracket have curiously shed that self-righteousness. It has been replaced by a refreshing air of humility, like someone who got a little too drunk the last time you saw them, and felt shame and regret about something stupid they’d done.

“My bracket’s shot,” they announce. “No one saw that upset coming.” And you nod your head in sad agreement, your fever starting to wear off as well.

“How could you have forsaken me, bracket?”

The fact is that there are 68 teams in the 2011 NCAA tournament, and if you know enough about all of these teams to produce a well-informed bracket, then I would wager you probably aren’t doing a whole lot else. The casual viewer, meanwhile, can fare just as well, though.

As with any other problem or puzzle, the first thing to do is gather the information. In this case, the hard work has already been done for you. Teams are seeded 1 to 16 on each branch.

Heavyweights (1’s and 2’s)- These are your workhorses and they are 1 and 2 for a reason. You must respect them as such. There will be upsets, but best to ride these ponies far, as chances are, there will likely be 2 of them in the finals.

Dark Horses (3-9)- These are the ones to worry about, as they will make or break your bracket. And breaking you bracket, though it is awfully fun to say, is not what you want to happen. Play the percentages here, and take most of them to get past a round or two, and maybe a couple, preferably a 3 or a 4, to the Elite Eight.

Long-Shots (10-16)- Now proceed with extreme caution here. Most of these teams should be gone after the first round if things play out as expected. But there are always a few that squeak through, and in most cases, they are entirely unpredictable. Select them based on personal connection, gut feeling, or just because you like their name, but if you take them as far as the Sweet Sixteen, you’re on your own.

Now I must go, for I hear the sweet sounds of the bracket’s siren song stirring and am powerless to resist.