By Brendan Marks, CJ Moore and Lindsay Schnell
With the NCAA Tournament selection committee revealing its top 16 teams on Saturday, we finally have our first idea of how the bracket may break.
Still TBD, though? If those teams up top will hold firm, or if someone unforeseen is about to make their charge — or, more generally, what fresh college hoops chaos is around the bend.
Sadly, we lack a crystal ball. But we do have answers to your questions.
(Note: Submitted questions have been lightly edited for clarity and length.)
Who is the next big-time coach to retire? — Peter B.
I was actually just thinking of this the other day while watching Houston (Kelvin Sampson is 69).
First, let’s run through a few of the more veteran coaches of top programs and their ages. Bruce Pearl at Auburn will be 65 next month, Tennessee’s Rick Barnes is 70, Rick Pitino at St. John’s is 72, Michigan State’s Tom Izzo is 70 and Bill Self at Kansas is a baby at just 62.
Other coaches who aren’t currently in the Top 25 but are still the elder statesmen of their sport include La Salle’s Fran Dunphy (76), Oregon’s Dana Altman (65) and Gonzaga’s Mark Few (62). As we’re having this conversation remember that Miami’s Jim Larranaga stepped down in December at age 75.
As you can see, all but two are old enough to qualify for Medicare. So when will they ride off into the sunset?
If I were a betting woman — I’m not — I’d put my money on Barnes or Sampson, especially if Sampson and Houston win the title this year. Barnes, who considers himself a teacher above all else, wants to win but is not driven by hanging banners. (That’s not a knock on anyone who is hanging banners.) If someone is coaching into their 70s, it’s fair to wonder if they have any hobbies — and if not, are they gonna get any in the later decades of their life?
I didn’t mention Iowa’s Fran McCaffrey above but at 65 — he’ll be 66 in May — and with a frustrated fan base, don’t be surprised if he walks away at the end of this season.
I’d say the dark horse here is Pearl. If Auburn wins it all this year, does he call it a basketball career and move on to one of his other interests? If you follow him on social media, you know he has a lot of opinions. With Pearl, anything seems possible. — Schnell
UConn’s Liam McNeeley goes to the basket against St. John’s in early February. (Joe Buglewicz / Getty Images)
UConn fan here. Can you help me understand what is happening with the team and the coaching? How can they go from beating Top 25 teams to losing, or nearly losing, to terrible teams? — George J.
George is far from the only UConn fan wondering, to use his original language, “WTF” is up with the Huskies.
It should be apparent by now that what Dan Hurley and the Huskies accomplished the past two seasons is very likely a once-in-a-lifetime feat: winning consecutive national championships, the second in truly dominant fashion. There’s a reason UConn is only the third program — joining 1991-92 Duke and 2006-07 Florida — to go back-to-back since John Wooden’s UCLA dynasty ended in the 1970s. Hurley is a terrific coach and an insatiable winner, but I hope UConn fans realize that operating at that level every year is impossible, especially in this era of player movement. Being regular contenders is one thing, and Huskies fans should expect that as long as Hurley is head coach. But expecting a juggernaut every season? I mean, no program since Wooden’s has sustained that level for more than a year or two at a time.
But what’s up with this team specifically? Obviously, losing Liam McNeeley — UConn’s best offensive threat, in my opinion — for eight games was no bueno. (The team went 5-3.) Alex Karaban also missed time in the nonconference, and Ahmad Nowell has dealt with a lingering shoulder issue. The impact of those losses goes beyond Hurley not having some of his best players available; it’s also the trickle-down impact on the rest of the rotation, and guys never feeling fully comfortable in their roles.
Beyond the injuries, though, UConn’s biggest issue is its defense. Hurley’s team is 98th in KenPom’s adjusted defensive efficiency rankings, and it only just cracked the top 100. It’s been a season-long issue, but especially in defending without fouling and 3-point defense. The Huskies are 341st nationally and worst amongst all high-major teams in defensive foul rate, per KenPom, which also explains why their opponents have attempted the third-most free throws of any high-major team (behind only Ohio State and Boston College). That’s improved a little lately — in UConn’s five Big East losses, its opponents averaged 16.8 free throws per game, down from 22.3 for the season — but it’s still a recurring problem. And the Huskies’ shoddy 3-point defense has been “a thing” for long enough that it goes beyond opponent shooting luck.
UConn’s opponents are shooting 35.7 percent from 3, which explains why the Huskies are sub-275 (and eighth-worst amongst high-major teams) in 3-point defense. Again, there’s been a slight uptick recently — in the team’s five Big East losses, opponents shot 34.4 percent from 3 — but that would still be a sub-200 rate nationally.
A few other things factor in, too — like Karaban’s slight offensive regression and the team’s (obvious) struggles with full-court pressure, which stems from it lacking a natural point guard. But the defense has been the constant. — Marks
Give me three to five teams outside of the Power 4 that could make a run to the Sweet 16 or possibly the Elite Eight. — Sidney T.
Since you said Power 4, I’m going to allow myself to talk Big East teams here, and I’d like to take this opportunity to say that I won’t be surprised at all if Creighton makes a deep run. Center Ryan Kalkbrenner is one of the best big men in the country, and he can be especially tough to guard because teams just aren’t used to dealing with someone who’s 7 feet 1. The Bluejays are well-coached, experienced and won’t be intimidated by anyone.
Second up: This might be my West Coast bias showing, but boy, I am a believer in Saint Mary’s. The Gaels are talented, tough and play so, so well together. Point guard Augustas Marciulionis won’t wow you with his athleticism but he’s incredibly smart and crafty with the ball. He knows exactly what type of shot his team needs, who should take it and how to make it happen. The Gaels are mature, too, with three seniors in the starting five.
And finally, a third team. I’ve been saying for weeks that UC-Irvine of the Big West is arguably the most consistent team west of the Rockies this year, given the ups and downs of usual suspects like Gonzaga, UCLA and Arizona. (Also did you know KenPom has Irvine ranked No. 12 nationally in adjusted defensive efficiency?)
But then two weeks ago, UC-San Diego went and throttled Irvine at Irvine, winning 85-67. Both teams currently sit at 12-2 in the Big West, and I’m already looking forward to the conference tournament. A two-bid Big West is a pipe dream, so it’s probably just the auto-qualifier who will dance. All of which is to say: If Irvine or San Diego are in the bracket, don’t be surprised if they’re renamed Cinderella. — Schnell
When will networks extend the 2-hour game window by 15 or 30 minutes to curb game overlap? It’s worse than ever. — Paul R.
Sadly, I do not foresee the networks adjusting, but college basketball could do plenty to shrink the actual time it takes to play a game. I’m not anti-replay, but in its current form, it is taking too long, and way too many calls are reviewed unnecessarily. So let’s completely change the current format and move to a football-like instant replay system.
Each coach is awarded one review, and if he uses it and a call is overruled — so he was correct — he’s issued one extra review. Eliminate the officials deciding to go to the monitor; it has to be from the coach. And instead of allowing the game officials at the monitor, every game has a designated replay official who is not courtside but in a room with giant televisions and has a time limit on the review. (Why are officials reviewing these calls on tiny monitors?!) For the time limit, let’s call it a minute. Heck, I’d be good with 30 seconds. So, at maximum, we would have four reviews in a game. There would be no discussion with the three officials calling the game, taking away bias toward the original call. And if there’s questionable contact — such as a shot to the groin — the offending player is sent immediately to the bench while the replay official reviews. The game continues and the offending player can return once the replay official makes a ruling. If additional free throws are awarded, those are taken during the next stoppage.
And voilà, there’s about 10 minutes eliminated from every game. — Moore
Seeing as this year has a few teams that are grading out as some of the best ever in terms of KenPom efficiency, do you think that’s a result of teams being that great, or is it because top teams are beginning to play a style that grades out well on the KenPom system and more analytically friendly? — Connor M.
Great question. First, some context. Auburn’s net rating, which adjusted offense minus adjusted defense, is currently 36.67. If the season were to finish today, that would be fourth-best ever behind 1999 Duke (43.01), 2001 Duke (37.32) and 2015 Kentucky (36.91). Anything over 30 is elite and usually enough to be No. 1. There are currently five teams at plus-30 (Auburn, Duke, Houston, Florida and Tennessee).
Your theory makes sense, because this will end up the most efficient season ever in college basketball, and teams are smarter than ever before about how to efficiently score the ball. More 3s, layups and free throws and less mid-range. But that means defensive numbers are also higher than ever.
My theory: Because of the COVID-19 and transfer rules, we have some super teams that are deeper and older than ever. Because the best mid-major players are transferring up, you had high-majors winning those nonconference games by wider margins and inflating their numbers. You also have some haves and have-nots at the high-major level based on their NIL budgets. It’ll be interesting to see how that plays out in the NCAA Tournament. The data would suggest that we should have fewer upsets. We’ll see. Could make for some good offseason discussion with coaches to get their theories. — Moore
With this era of mega-conferences, how do you expect the selection committee to navigate potentially marching up conference opponents as early as the second round? With so many B1G/SEC teams likely to qualify for the big dance, it seems unavoidable unless the committee intentionally under- or over-seeds a team solely to avoid a conference matchup (which would seem very unfair). — Sam E.
It will be unavoidable, Sam, although history gives us a good roadmap as to how the selection committee might try to work around it.
You’re correct that the selection committee isn’t going to artificially inflate or deflate a team’s seed simply to avoid those matchups. (Nor could it if it wanted to, given the NCAA’s seeding and bracketing processes.) But just to be clear, selection committee chairperson Bubba Cunningham reaffirmed that sentiment during Saturday’s top-16 mock bracket reveal. Cunningham said the committee could (and did) move teams along the same seed line to achieve “better balance” in the bracket, but it won’t and can’t go so far as to drop a team from, let’s say, a 4 to a 5 — especially not just to avoid an early conference rematch.
NCAA bracketing procedures also factor in here, although they become “relaxed” when a league gets more than nine teams in. The SEC should shatter that threshold and, in all likelihood, will set a new single-season bids record by one league, surpassing the Big East’s 11 in 2011. The Big Ten, meanwhile, also had 10 teams included in The Athletic’s most recent bracket, thanks to Nebraska sneaking into the First Four.
The way it’s supposed to work is, if teams have already played three times before the Big Dance — importantly, between the regular season and conference tournament — then they’re not supposed to be able to meet until the Elite Eight. If they’ve played twice, then the Sweet 16 should be their earliest third meeting. But if teams have played only once before, then the round of 32 becomes fair game — which is exactly what happened in 2011, when four of the Big East’s 11 schools met in the second round: Marquette and Syracuse, plus Cincinnati and eventual national champion UConn. It’s somewhat unavoidable, so I’d similarly expect at least two all-SEC round of 32 games this postseason.
Beyond 2011, there have been three other conferences — the Big East in 2012 and the ACC in 2017 and 2018 — that got exactly nine teams in, and the brackets for those seasons all included at least one potential intra-conference rematch in the Sweet 16. That’s more in line with what I expect the Big Ten’s paths will be in the final bracket — although them getting in a 10th team would likely mean we get both an SEC and Big Ten rematch in the round of 32.
All of which is a long way of saying, be glad you’re not on the selection committee this season. Headaches abound. — Marks
(Photo of Tennessee’s Rick Barnes and Darlinstone Dubar: Johnnie Izquierdo / Getty Images)
