Remind Me Why We Watch College Hoops Again
With college hoops kicking off this week, I wondered why there wasn’t more fanfare ringing in the new season. Then I wondered why I wondered that.
.
Slowly, ever so slowly, the belittling of the WNBA among basketball critics is eroding. Memes are being drawn up, philosophies followed, anti-ladyball sentiments appearing more irrational and the movement toward the WNBA being a respected league has already begun to take root.
>
This respect has formed from a) esoteric sports fans ironically liking the WNBA long enough that they just started actually liking it and b) bored NBA fans with nothing better to do over the summer but to fill the void with the WNBA. What both demographics learned is that the girls can play. They can’t jump worth a damn, but they play hard. They hustle and have a steady sense of the game’s fundamentals, spacing, ball movement and play calling … they understand everything casual fans miss.
Weird. That sounds like the reputation college ball has developed among people rationalizing why they don’t like the NBA. What are they going to say to rationalize the dismissal of the WNBA?
The best part of college hoops. You'll notice there's nary a hoop or ball in the picture.
College hoops is a weeding-out process for the pros. A revenue churning operation for each school’s athletic program and a gathering spot for the student body. It’s also, depending on the month, the matchup or the fullness of the moon, an occasionally exciting couple of hours. What it is not, sadly, is quality basketball.
University basketball, like everything else college kids touch, is sloppy.
>
I understand why college ball remains (and will continue to remain) popular and probably more popular than the WNBA. But just because I understand it, doesn’t mean it makes any sense. Does that make sense?
.
So much of the average college fan’s reasons for preferring college over the pros sound good as long as you don’t think too hard about it. A consensus among NBA detractors is that the league profits from employing thugs who take five steps on their way to an uncontested dunk. This isn’t true, but let’s say it is. Let’s say sloppy play exhibited by athletes with dollar signs in their eyes is an accurate depiction of the pro game. I dare those naysayers then to explain their support of the college game.
.
The college game – from a technical standpoint - is weak. Even when both teams play hard, they play poorly. With the exception of the few dozen college athletes who graduate to the pros each year, it’s like watching a squat version of the Knicks playing the Warriors … only without the massive scoring. Ugh. I just threw up a little in my mouth. I’m regretting that second helping of sausage patties. Why is this the case (the horrible play of college basketball, not the sausage patty part)? Because they’re kids. Most of college hoops’ players are only slightly above-average to begin with. On top of that, depending on the stage, they’re nervous or simply don’t have a natural head for the game. And did I mention that they’re kids?
.
It’s perfectly acceptable for a newborn fawn to wobbly struggle with its first steps. Nothing wrong with it. But don’t try to sell me that somehow it’s a purer – and therefore better – form of running than a full-grown deer.
.
Shot efficiency, turnover efficiency, shot selection, low-post moves; there’s a reason high draft picks come to the NBA and have to develop these things. There’s a reason only a select few rookies are NBA ready when they arrive in the league. Thousands of students play college basketball each year and fewer than 20 of them will make a significant positive impact on any of the professional teams that draft them.
.
If it’s a principles thing with the NBA, a resentment that these athletes can hustle and run plays yet chose not to despite their handsome pay, fair enough. There’s points to be had there. But again, why would the college game be the answer?
.
College programs thrive on the level of talent they can bring into the universities year after year. And the best programs – the ones that annually play the “best” brand of basketball, are the ones that field winners. And how many of those winning players on those winning teams do you suppose walk onto the court worried about their chemlab assignment due on Wednesday? In fact, how many of those winners do you suppose even have chemlab? The players that drive excitement, sponsorship, viewership and institutional popularity in the universities are the ones aiming for the NBA. It would be naïve to believe that because college players aren’t making money, that they’re not still playing for it.
.
Let’s be honest, it would be naïve to believe some college players aren’t making money.
.
The women’s game? Even the all-stars of the league are lucky to clear $60,000 a year and this is as far as a female basketball player can go. They’re not playing for anything else. Hustle, drive, teamwork, skill and this is the end of the line for them. Who’s beating the drum for them?
.
In the end, I’m very capable of believing that it all comes down to the viewer’s own ego. You went to Kansas (par exemple), you were a Jayhawk. You were never a Bull or a Laker or a Mystic or a Mercury and you don’t owe them anything. You’ll root for Paul Pierce, Kirk Hinrich or Wilt Chamberlain because they were Jayhawks, but not really their pro teams. College sports, more than any other level of sport, allow us to legitimately feel a part of it all.
Whoa. College hoops fans actually gawking at Erin Andrews. I did not expect that.
And I’m not knocking that experience. Let ‘em paint their face, gawk at Erin Andrews, memorize lewd chants, co-opt their team’s glory as their own. That’s what college is there for. Live it up. This isn’t a brushback pitch against any of that. But this is a clarification that none of that is basketball. There are the naysayers who berate the pro game, ignore the women’s game and deign to call the college game the best basketball has to offer.
But those people are confused. They must be, because it’s not even close.
.
______________________
Photos courtesy of Yahoo! Sports via Getty Images
5 Responses for “Remind Me Why We Watch College Hoops Again”
Leave a Reply
The only thing worse than someone becoming uspet about a sports blog is someone commenting on a SPORTS BLOG’s comment forums (with SPORTS BLOG in caps) asking for research and data while not providing any R&D of their own. Talk about ill-founded rebuttal.
Throw in the ‘sound like a whiny nutcase’ being stated after whining the phrase ‘blah blah’ and you have the perfect case of Internet Blitz rule #7. The only thing worse than being upset by an article is…writing that you are upset by it.
Natalie D
Look, you gotta give me something here.
You call my points lame and the “adversary” made up. But in between those statements you go on to agree with many of my points (pros generally shoot better than college kids, that purity of the game has nothing to do with the technical proficiency of it). You even present yourself as the very adversary I was referring to and that you say doesn’t exist.
You say arguing between the quality of play between the NCAA and the NBA (you never mention the WNBA) is a subjective argument and I’m saying that parts of it are not. You’re confusing issues (indeed creating your own straw man argument, buddy) by calling pros primadonnas and applying your “three Gs.” Unless you mean all of this is evident on the court. I don’t care what happens off it or on the side of it or near it. I pointedly omit the superficial parts of all three leagues. I understand that college hoops is more than just what happens on the court. Just as you should understand that the NBA’s All-Star Weekend has so much more to do with the fans than it does with the 82 games of the regular season.
It’s fine to disagree with me. I welcome and encourage it. But you confuse me. Are you applying your “three Gs” to simply the NBA All-Star Game (in which case, is that fair?) or are you applying it to the entirety of the NBA? If it’s the latter, what’s garbage about what goes on on the court? Give me examples. How is it glitzier on the court or more glamorous on the court than other pro leagues?
And remember, I never knock the peripherals of the college experience (or any of the three experiences, really) I knock the game.
You? You said you “don’t give a damn” about the NBA. You also said you don’t know why you’re into NCAA basketball.
It sure ain’t ’cause the quality of play on the court is the best available. And when you can refute that, tell me all about it.
Ya know what a straw man argument is, buddy? You build your case here by stating that college basketball fans like their version of the game for a reason that doesn’t hold up. Then you proceed to explain why that reason doesn’t hold up.
It’s a pretty lame effort. Of course, NBA players are better than college players. Of course a given NBA team shoots better than the best NCAA team. You’re comparing pros with amateurs. Purity of the game has nothing to do with technical proficiency or a deep understanding of the ins and and outs of the triangle and two defense. It’s not even about NCAA basketball. It’s just everything that the NBA isn’t. Can’t figure out what I’m talking about? Three words: NBA All-Star Weekend.
For me NBA is the three Gs: Glitz, Glam and Garbage. To say I don’t give a damn about it expends more energy than the topic is worth.
NCAA Basketball, that’s something I can get into. Why? Purity of the game? A lower ratio of prima donnas to genuine people?
I don’t know.
In some ways, that’s the point. You’re applying the rules of objectivism to a completely subjective argument. The only battle you when is one in which you create the adversary. Color me unimpressed.
I’ll try to keep my whiny-nutcasing down to a dull roar.
The point in the post was not to knock college basketball as much as it was to knock those who write off the NBA and WNBA and then defend their reasoning by claiming it’s motivated by the poor product being put out on the floor. The statistics just don’t support such beliefs.
I was asked to do a little research, give a little data.
I mentioned top-ranked Kansas in the post. The No. 1 team in the country is coming into the season averaging .478 FG%, .371 3PT%, .725 FT% and 14.5 turnovers per game.
I used those four stats because a) they measure efficiency, b) they are quantifiable stats across all three leagues and c) pace or rate of play don’t change these stats (or they are easy to adjust).
The Jayhawks’ four stats listed above would rank in order: 6th, 9th, 21st and tied for last in the NBA. Not only that, the Hawks’ 3PT% is inflated because the three-point line is closer in the college game than the NBA. Also, if you adjust the turnover rate by the Jayhawks to a 48 minute NBA game, it increases from 14.5 to 17.42.
I mentioned the Knicks as being one of the more sloppy teams in the pros. They’ve also got one of the worst records. Again, adjusting for length of games, the Knicks turn the ball over less (15.3 per), shoot for a better average at the free throw line (.803) and shoot .365 from 19-21 feet out (comparable to a NCAA three). The Knicks are one of the five worst teams in the league.
How can anyone say that college basketball is a better brand of ball when the best team in the nation plays like one of the worst teams in the pros?
Then there’s the WNBA. They’ve got their three-point line 22 feet 9 inches away from the center of the basket (23’9″ in NBA, 20’9″ in NCAAB). It plays the same amount of minutes as College hoops so no adjustment needed there.
Because many knock the WNBA as being far inferior to both other leagues, let’s take a look at the WNBA’s best statistical team: The Phoenix Mercury.
They finished their season averaging .460 FG%, .386 3PT%, .855 FT% and 14.7 turnovers per game. The Mercury shoot 1.8% (.018) worse than the Jayhawks and either surpass or are comparable in the other three.
These are simple stats, but I invite anyone to take a look at the advanced efficiency stats of all three leagues. The divide only grows.
Again, I’m speaking about what happens on the court. The overall package of college basketball truly is fantastic. The fans, the excitement, all of March, even messy basketball can be tons of fun. I’ve never said otherwise.
But it IS messy. Messier than the other two leagues by far.
This is quite possibly the most ill-founded argument I have ever read. I understand what you’re saying about the WNBA not being as respected as it should–blah blah nothing groundbreaking with that sentiment, but before you go bashing an entire sport that many people love on a SPORTS BLOG, do your research, give some data, and stop sounding like a whiny nutcase.