Look for NCAA to add a cherry to its expansion sundae

By Matt Vachlon

...And then, like a bad dream, it was all over.

At least, that’s how I felt upon hearing the news Thursday that the NCAA was only expanding to a 68-team tournament. After watching the quality of some of the games from this year’s NIT, it truly was unsettling to realize that all those teams could’ve been in the NCAA’s 96-team expansion model.

However, after returning to my senses, I realized that the NCAA’s new plan still had one glaring omission, which leads to one major question.

How will new teams be added into the bracket?

It’s a pretty safe bet that since the NCAA already had one play-in game with 65 teams, that it will simply add three more play-in games so that each region will now have a play-in game. Who will be playing in those games is a different story.

A common assumption is that the play-in games will continue to be for the right to be a 16-seed. I don’t deny that sounds like something the NCAA would do. After all, you can’t humiliate the big schools by making them play an extra game.

Or can you?

You can if the NCAA goes for the money grab. Seriously, I hope the NCAA goes all fifth-grade bully in a school cafeteria on this plan and tries to shake out every bit of loose change available before its implementation.

Now, before I go any further, I know what you’re thinking.

You’re saying to yourself, “How can you utter those words, Matt, especially after writing this a mere two months ago? And even more than that, why are you now backing the same selfish interests that you directly criticized the NCAA of when you wrote about expansion?”

In short: because it’s a win-win for everybody.

Let’s acknowledge for a second that the play-in game was going nowhere. Even though no one even remotely cared about Winthrop vs. Arkansas Pine-Bluff (except those associated with the schools) this past year, you never heard any rumor that the NCAA would go back to a 64-team field. That’s because you’d have to give up an at-large bid to do that since both were recipients of automatic births and likely cost yourself the presence of a big-name school.

I understand that logic, even if I disagree with it. But now, you’re going to tell me that one of the attractions of signing this TV deal for CBS/Turner was to have four of these games?

Nope, the draw is that you match up the bubble teams.

This accomplishes two things. First, it turns that Tuesday night of play-in games into a must-see event. Using teams suggested by ESPN’s Dana O'Neil, a quadruple header featuring Florida-Virginia Tech, UTEP-Illinois, Minnesota-Utah State and Mississippi State-Georgia Tech becomes instantly more palatable than the aforementioned match-up. I know that despite my protests against a larger field, I wouldn’t be against an extra day of meaningful basketball.

Second, from the NCAA’s side of things it gets us used to an extra round of games. According to CBS’s Gary Parrish, the NCAA hasn’t promised it won’t revisit expanding to 96 in teams in the future and I don’t doubt that. The jump to adding an extra round isn’t as great when you’re already used to an extra day.

I realize that my plan pushes us closer to the evil that is a 96-team field. But the reality is that if the NCAA wants it, it will come, no matter what we think. In the meantime, I just want 68 teams to be a great as it can possibly be.

Phil's big day a blessing for PGA

By Matt Vachlon

Phil needed this. His wife needed this. His family needed this.

But the PGA needed this more.

I mean they really, really needed this.

When Phil Mickelson’s putt on 18 clinched his third victory at the Masters and led to his ensuing embrace with his wife, Amy, it may have brought about one of the more touching sports moments in recent memory, but it very likely caused some of the PGA’s big wigs to high five as well.

And they’d be smart to cash in on it.

I’m not trying to be crass. There is nothing more touching in sports than raw emotion in its truest form and this was a prime example. While I will not pretend to know what Mickelson and his family have been through over the past year in dealing with Amy’s and his mother’s breast cancer, the fact is it had to be hellish.

So the Mickelsons were understandably ecstatic to have something positive happen.

But if you’re the PGA, you also had to be ecstatic.

You see, the coverage leading up to this week wasn’t about Mickelson. It was about Tiger. That’s not a total shock. After all, Tiger is back and unquestionably he’s the straw that stirs the PGA’s drink. Add to the fact that he kept himself in the running to win the tournament all the way through Sunday, and you can see why much of the coverage was warranted.

The problem is, Tiger still has a bit of an image problem right now. The resulting chaos doesn’t appear to be going away anytime soon and the PGA desperately needs to distance itself from this.

However, thanks to one of the most ironic weekends in sports history it now has an opportunity to do so.

Sure a noticeably rusty Woods gutted out a tie for fourth place at his first tournament in five months. But his absence was due to self-induced marital issues. Mickelson also had distractions which kept him away from the game of golf. However, his distractions were of the life or death variety and were beyond his control.

Phil ended up the winner, both athletically and morally.

An added plus is that Phil Mickelson is not some Johnny-come-lately with a great story. He’s a pillar of the sport, as evidenced by the winning of his third green jacket and fourth Major and, as a result, he’s one of the few who can rival Tiger’s popularity.

Let me be clear, I’m still not an advocate for making athletes into role models, as I explained here . But what happened at Augusta on Sunday was something so truly special on an emotional level and so badly needed for the sport that the PGA would be foolish to not try and capitalize on it.

Butler Still Wins

By Bob Herman

It's the perfect story that just didn't technically quite happen, yet we all wanted to happen.

When Butler barely lost to Duke 61-59 Monday night in the NCAA championship game, and I mean barely, the first reaction was utter shock and disbelief. Butler had gotten this close, and it came down to a missed Gordon Hayward fade-away baseline jumper and the most dramatic half-court shot that couldn't go in.

For a team like Butler to make the national championship game is, well, not very common. It was the first time the Dawgs had ever sniffed this kind of territory, and to get that close and not seal the deal was devastating to say the least.

But this all needs to be put into perspective.

Heading into this year, Butler was ranked 11th in the nation, but no one really expected this team to make it to the national championship game. For god sakes, this well-oiled machine of a team made it to the school's first-ever Elite Eight, Final Four, and national championship game.

Anyone who is a fan of Butler--and even those who aren't--will always remember this college basketball season for what Butler did. The Dawgs took on the biggest of the bigs and beat nearly all of them. Yes, this is the ultimate goal for any team, but it's the way Butler almost did it that gives hope to every other small school out there (I apologize for the indirect "Hoosiers" reference, but it's true...).

Now the big news is whether Brad Stevens will take this, that, or the other thing and if Gordon should stay or go now. But those are side items to a season that I and every other Butler fan will never, never, forget.

To the entire 2009-10 Butler Bulldogs basketball team, we can't thank you enough for what you've given us and the basketball world in an age that is rampant with recruiting malfeasance and teams run by the almighty dollar. You gave everyone a team to cheer for, and you played the right way, The Butler Way.

Sure, Duke won according to the record books, and I can't stop thinking about the "what ifs" from that game, but Butler is still the true winner of this year's college basketball season. Butler took the sport back to its roots and captured the hearts of millions along the way.

And as Ron Nored was quoted, "This isn't the end of our story. It's only the beginning."