Speaking of peaking

Which teams saved their best ball for the right time?

Just so you loyal readers know, tears are streaming down the 'Bag's face as we write this last installment of the college hoops season. Thanks to those of you who have read the 'Bag and sent in thoughtful questions this season. I've had a lot of fun and hope you have too.

Let's start by saying this: There's a reason I call the conference tournaments "Cheap TV Drama Week." Especially the big-conference tourneys. So Arizona lost to UCLA? So Marquette lost to UAB? Cheap TV drama. The losses mean nothing to Arizona and Marquette. If you're smart, you won't let the upsets affect your bracket picks.

Moving forward, Carlos Goenaga of Houston asks if I could name the teams that peaked too early this season. This reminds me of something Kansas coach Roy Williams once told me about "peaking" for the tournament: If every coach could consciously do things to encourage "peaking," wouldn't they do that?

That said, any list of teams that reached their high points too early (and now appear headed for early tourney exits, or no bids at all) would have to include Notre Dame (never developed much of an inside game), Oklahoma State (too many turnovers and foul problems for an experienced team), Indiana (the mysterious demise of Tom Coverdale and Kyle Hornsby), Oregon (see Notre Dame), Louisville (injuries and the on-again, off-again loss of Marvin Stone) and Alabama (lack of outside shooting).

More intriguing is this question: Has Kentucky already peaked? Nobody expected the Wildcats to go undefeated in the SEC, and one school of thought says that losing an SEC tournament game might not be a bad thing. (See: Kentucky '96.) We'll only know for sure on April 7, but UK's remarkable defense (the Cats' calling card) is far less subject to streakiness than its offense. I'm inclined to think Kentucky won't go into the tank in the postseason.

At the other end, we have our eye on a few teams that are playing their best ball of the year on the eve of the tournament and could easily survive though the second weekend or longer: Syracuse (finally finding legit support for forward Carmelo Anthony), Memphis (behind the improved play of senior forward Chris Massie), Wisconsin (senior guard Kirk Penney makes the big plays ahead of a young but maturing cast), Xavier (which blew through the Atlantic 10 after point guard Lionel Chalmers returned from injury) and Creighton (witness the Jays' blowout of Southern Illinois this week).

David Oblath of Brooklyn, N.Y., asks which factor I consider most when filling out my NCAA bracket. It's hard to pick one, David. I take a number of factors into consideration: toughness, experience, recent results, coaches, particular matchups and perimeter play, to name just a few. Each year in its tournament preview Sports Illustratedpicks one factor to look at -- and this year is no different, so be sure to check out next week's issue.

Chris Martin of Greeley, Colo., wonders if I think Kansas (a possible No. 1 seed) can challenge for the title without Wayne Simien. I've been saying since January that the Jayhawks could still make the Final Four without the sophomore forward (much to the amusement of one Seth Davis), and only recently have other pundits come around to agreeing with me. At the same time, Kansas has a very small margin for error if it wants to win it all. It can be done -- the Jayhawks did it in '88 with one great senior (Danny Manning), and this year's squad may have two (Nick Collison and Kirk Hinrich) -- but Simien replacement Jeff Graves will have to stay out of foul trouble, and so far he hasn't been able to do that.

Ian Kelly of Spokane, Wash. asks if Gonzaga will get an at-large berth after losing the West Coast Conference final to San Diego. Unlike many others, I have a feeling the Zags are going to get the shaft. Gonzaga has a decent RPI (in the 40's) and played a tough non-conference schedule this season, but its only big wins came against Utah (early), N.C. State and Tulsa. As we saw last year, the tournament committee clearly doesn't take Gonzaga seriously, and I don't expect this season to be any different. I hope I'm wrong.

Jeff Geitz of Emporia, Kan., wants to know why so many scandals have come to light in recent weeks. Are more teams trying to skirt the rules or are schools just holding themselves more accountable? Well, Jeff, we'd be Pollyannas if we thought either scenario was the truth. Cheating has always been rampant in college sports, and guess what? It still is. But the schools aren't blowing the whistle on themselves. Lately that responsibility has fallen to either journalists (see Georgia, Fresno State) or conferences (see St. Bonaventure). Couple of points: 1) Schools do appear to be applying more self-imposed sanctions these days, under the notion that self-flagellation now will save harsher NCAA penalties later. 2) More and more, college hoops becomes a nationally followed sport in March alone, which may explain in part why so many of these scandals are coming out now.

Steve from Stockbridge, Mich. wonders what will happen to college hoops if the NBA adopts a 20-year-old minimum age requirement. That's still hard to say. If players under 20 are allowed in the NBDL, you might finally have a full-fledged basketball minor league, and the college game might not change much. If not, you'll see a lot more two-year stays in college, which means more stars (a good thing) but also more fly-by-nighters who have no interest in going to school. Stay tuned.

Mike from New York asks how Boston College's Troy Bell was left off the list of nominees for the Wooden Award. This gives me the chance to make amends for dissing Bell some time back for his high status on nbadraft.net, and while the point guard should be on the list, I'd still argue that he isn't a serious National Player of the Year candidate. For large parts of this season, Bell and his team were pretty unimpressive. Clearly that has changed in recent weeks.

James Runyon of Belfry, Ky. wants to know if coaches from elite programs get the shaft when it comes to Coach of the Year awards. Hardly. My problem is that elite-program coaches get nominated too often for the award, which is why my requirement is that your team has to achieve beyond expectations to be considered. In other words, if you're a preseason top-10 team, your coach probably doesn't have a chance. Tough. In the grand scheme of things, Coach of the Year isn't nearly as important as, say, winning a national title.

Still wild on the 'Cats?

Got plenty of mail after last week's Arizona-Kentucky breakdown. In response to my contention that both schools have separated themselves from the field as much as Maryland, Kansas and Duke had by this time last season, reader Rob Bartlett of Miami, Okla. argues that I'm only proving the fallacy of setting teams apart -- considering of that trio, only Maryland reached last year's NCAA final. Good point, Rob, to an extent. March is as unpredictable as ever, and all credit to Indiana for not only beating Duke last year, but also getting all the way to the title game. I would still argue, though, that the two best teams (Maryland and Kansas) met in the national semis, which (thankfully) shouldn't happen this year if Arizona and Kentucky are placed in their expected regions. (And yes, I still think they're the two best teams.)

Then again, Michael Lilien of Toms River, N.J. points out that the top two schools (from the final Associated Press poll) have met in the title game only five times since 1957 -- and not at all since 1975's UCLA-Kentucky championship game. Good work in the catacombs, Michael, and while it would be silly to rule out other teams from contention, that won't keep me from dreaming of a UA-UK game -- not just because they're the top two teams, but because they match up so evenly.

As for my analysis of that possible meeting, Eric Wright from Lexington, Ky. took issue with my point that Kentucky doesn't have a point-forward quite like Luke Walton, noting that UK's Erik Daniels fits that role as well. I'll admit that Daniels is more of a point-forward than most other teams have, but the fact remains that Walton is the college game's best passing forward in years, bad wheel and all. Nor does Daniels have Walton's big-game experience, which could be critical during a down-to-the-wire finish in, say, New Orleans.

After reading the 'Bag's recent story in SI on Kentucky, Brad Miles of Louisville, Ky. asks why UK fans "who are passionate about their program and do not accept losing easily" are perceived as racist. I don't think that's necessarily the case. I did quote former Kentucky athletic director C.M. Newton as saying that racism still exists among some of the (admittedly small) group of UK fans who have pilloried coach Tubby Smith over the years. And I thought it was revealing that Newton brought up the racism issue himself in our interview -- without my even suggesting it. Still, Newton himself allows that racism among Wildcats fans is limited to a tiny but vocal minority.

Lastly, Joe Flowers of Sacramento, Calif. asks if Arizona or Kentucky would look so promising if they were in the Big 12. In a word: Yes. Arizona won on the homecourt of the Big 12 champ (Kansas), while Kentucky ran the table in what is arguably the nation's best conference. End of story.

And finally

If anyone is up for seeing my ugly mug on MTV, check out its NCAA tournament show on March 19 at 8 p.m. ET. Once again, thanks for reading the 'Bag this year, and let's get ready to enjoy the greatest show in sports.

Couple of final reader comments:

First, from Dave Hurst, Bloomington, Ind.:

Regarding your response to the question about the five-second count, there is no hash mark on the floor anymore that relates to a call or violation. It was removed a few years ago. The only mark on the sidelines now is to delineate the coaching box. As an observer of officials for the Big Ten, I will say that there is some sentiment out there for doing something to eliminate some of the counts for the officials. As a former official it's my opinion that referees spend too much time counting (10 second, closely guarded dribbling, then holding, etc.) and this takes away from their being able to watch the action.. I personally would like to see a 30-second shot clock and eliminate the five-second closely guarded count.

And from Brad Burnes of Phoenix, Ariz.:

I just read one of your old columns in which someone wrote in to say that ESPN must add squeaky shoes to the highlights. As a former ESPN production assistant who spent more than three years putting together highlights for SportsCenter, I can tell you they don't add any effects. Editors keep the volume of the game at a standard level and, more often than not, the actual game sounds come off sounding lower on air because there is also highlight music being played. Sometimes we get "clean feeds" of games where the announcers are on a separate audio channel from the actual game sounds. If that's the case, the editors never use the channel with the announcers, just the squeaky shoes and rim rattlings.

Sports Illustrated senior writer Grant Wahl covers college basketball for SI.com. Click here to send him a comment or question.

 

Related information

Stories

Grant Wahl's College Basketball Mailbag Archive

Multimedia

Visit Video Plus for the latest audio and video