On the first day of the men's NCAA basketball tournament, I came across a column posted on the NBA front page of Fox Sports by Charley Rosen. In the column, Charley Rosen was discussing why he preferred the NBA over college basketball.
Of course, everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but the arguments that Rosen was using for his preferrence were completely off-base. Allow me to list (and rebut) some of those arguments:
1. By and large, college teams are over-coached. Offenses are mostly ineffective. Defenses are primitive. Substitutions are frequently gratuitous and have little connection with matchups. And the sideline antics of too many coaches are over-the-top.
1a. Offenses are ineffective? Are you kidding, Charley? A well-run offense in college basketball is one of the most fluid and artistic experiences one can find. I understand that there are some teams...Memphis...who choose to not run an offense at all and just sprint up and down the court. But when watching the likes of Wisconsin, one cannot help but be amazed by the Badgers' cerebral breaking down of the opposing defense that ultimately leads to points.
When one watches an NBA game, there is no offense. It is typically one guy with the ball and four others standing around not moving. There is more movement out of a snail in a 24 hour period than there is out of an NBA team. But more on NBA offense later.
As far as the defenses go, see: Wisconsin. I hate to keep using Wisconsin as an example, but if you want to see a clinic of fundamental basketball, you watch Wisconsin. They play strong offense, stout defense, and are consistently one of the top 15 teams in the country. Meanwhile, NBA defense is as non-existent as their offensive movement. I cannot tell you how many times I have watched a ballhandler make a move towards the basket and the man guarding him either stands up straight to allow his pass or starts running downcourt in hopes of an easy fastbreak bucket off of a missed shot.
2. The only allure during the tournament is the constant threat of dramatic upsets. But except for bettors and alumni, who really cares?
2a. Apparently everyone cares. March Madness is the only event where even the anti-social nerd in accounting gets to talk trash with the rest of the office. And it's not all about trash talking or who does a better job at filling out their bracket. My parents and I go to a local sports bar on the first day of the tournament so we can enjoy all four of each cycle's games (for the record, no one does this for the NBA playoffs....or even the finals). In games such as the first round's Duke/Belmont battle, everyone in the establishment had a rooting interest. Yes, some wanted the upset to be completed by Belmont, but just as many were rooting for Duke (either for their brackets or because they are a devout fan).
3. Meanwhile, the skill level of NBA players continues to astound me. The NBA coaches and refs (ugh!) are far superior to their college equivalents. Pro offenses actually create spaces and angles that lead directly to shots. Pro defenses actually squeeze spaces and shut down angles that lead directly to misses.
3a. There is no disputing the skill level of the NBA is superior to that of the NCAA. Reason being: the NBA only takes the best of the NCAA. The same way the NCAA only takes the best of the world's high schoolers. That is a pathetic argument on Rosen's part and one would expect better out o####lobally-syndicated columnist and author.
I can, however, dispute the idea that the coaches and refs are superior. When given the talent that Phil Jackson was given with both the 90's Bulls and the early 00's Lakers, he would be viewed as a hack if he didn't win championships. Even the likes of Stan Van Gundy could have coached either of those teams to championships. And it is easier to lock up somewhat of a dynasty in the NBA because you maintain your players for many years, whereas college coaches get their best players for one, maybe two years at most. They have other players for a maximum of four years. Thusly, these coaches are forced to constantly reload. It makes the jobs that Coach K, Tom Izzo, and John Calipari have done at their respective institutions that much more amazing.
And the officials...the officials are quite possibly the worst part of the NBA. There are more uncalled travels in the NBA in a single season than there are in five seasons of NCAA basketball...but that is because NCAA officials actually have the guts to call a travel. And lets not forget that little gambling scandal the NBA seemed to brush under the rug.
An argument that Rosen failed to acknowledge is that the fans at college basketball games actually give a damn. Students strip down and paint themselves in school colors, the arena rocks when the opposing team attempts free throws, the band plays the school fight song at every intermission. Those who go to NBA games rarely have a rooting interest and are typically there because they had nothing better to do. The arena's are dead except for when the sound system blares some overly-synthesized, bass-ridden hip hop track.
When it comes down to it, the college basketball game is more funamentally sound, more entertaining, and a much bigger draw than the NBA has even hoped for since Jordan hung up the jersey (the second time). That is why CBS shells out BILLIONS of dollars for the exclusive broadcasting rights to every tournament game and advertisers view the first round of the tournament and the final four/championship weekend as a second Super Bowl opportunity. The NBA is a joke of its former self and that is why I, along with most everyone else in the country, choose to watch the college game.
Sorry Charley, but the NBA is only good as a sleep aid.
MU, great points, and for all of those reasons I do agree that college ball is better, but by a narrower margin than either you or Rosen would like to display. Obviously you probably agree somewhat, and you were ranting a little bit because Rosen is a ####. I wouldn't put the NBA down so far, especially with what is going on this season. The thing that gives the edge to NCAA for me is the atmosphere from day 1. I have camped out for games here in gainesville, celebrated championships, and nothing compares.
It is an excellent thing for you that he doesn't agree with you. He is that guy who says the Suns will miss the playoffs and Shaq blows. His columns are as exciting as an NBA regular season game, the excitment of a college game is beyond his comprehension.
I'm with Charley on this one, and allow me to defend him.
1) You, and so many others, seem to be under the impression that the only good type of offense is a smoothly run, college style offense in which every player touches the ball and teams milk the clock. AS far as Memphis goes, just because their offense is herky-jerky relative to their opponents, doesn't mean that it's not a good offense. It just means they don't have to run a perfect offense to score, which less talented teams like your darling Badgers have to. And in terms of defense, it is much easier to play defense at the collegiate level when teams are not going one-on-one and the offensive players are extraordinarily limited.
2) True, the tournament is extremely exciting, but exciting does not equal accurate. In fact, the reason the tournament is exciting is because it (unfairly) awards poorer(and less deserving) teams who wouldn't stand a chance in a seven game series to advance and results in some truly undeserving teams going way too far in a tournament they arguably don't deserve to be in from the get-go. And in terms of who cares, you guys are just arguing semantics. After bettors and alums, is there anybody else in the uni. Everyone= Bettors and Alums.
3) Why does the fact that Rosen's argument is simple and obvious make it a pathetic one. He's right on. The talent level is much lower, and the reason why is pretty much irrelevant.
I also agree with Charley about the coaching ability at the pro and collegiate levels. There is a reason why college(and college style) coaches rarely succeed at the pro-level, and the ones that experience success seem to do so with younger rosters. Coaching at the collegiate level is easier, in fact much easier, than in the NBA. Younger players pretty much are forced to listen to the coach and it also is in their best interest to do so, because a season long ride on the bench
could result in losses of millions of dollars down the road, not to mention that players are always in the shadow of their coaches. And if a player has a problem with his coach and wants to leave, it would cost him a year of play. College coaches have a much easier time playing boss than NBA coaches. The garbage that my Bulls have pulled(skipping practices, mouthing off in public and private about the coaches, locker room scuffles between rooks and vets and player-suggested suspensions) this season would ever fly at the college level. Poor Jim Boylan wouldn't have to put up with this stuff in the NCAA. Players wouldn't even think to pull that shtick off. Meanwhile, in the bigs, coaches have to deal with supremely egotistical superstars who cant be just fired like a coach can and have to mesh with grown-#### men who make more money than them and have no problem making themselves heard.
The NBA is where it is at and there is nothing i would rather watch than playoff basketball, preferably from the second round on in the East. The Wester playoffs will be phenominal and much, much more entertaining tha
What a joke. Every NBA fan who reads this blog gotta be coughing up his lungs. As a basketball fan I follow as much hoops as possible, High School, College, EuroLeague, Minor Leagues and NBA, of course. And I have fun watching all these levels. But to say 'NCAA over NBA' is just fanatical. What a moronic blog. You gotta be Knicks fan MUDropOut. Holy schmoley!
