Fox Sports’ Analyst Joel Klatt takes aim at the NCAA tournament | The Boneyard

Fox Sports’ Analyst Joel Klatt takes aim at the NCAA tournament

Travelman6

Travelman6

Joined
Dec 6, 2016
Messages
4,652
Reaction Score
12,381
fox-sports-analyst-joel-klatt-takes-aim-at-the-ncaa-v0-ibf6t9oowk7g1.jpeg
 
People would rather vote on a winner than settle things on a court or a field. Fundamental ignorance of "sport". Same people that cry "the best team didn't win" when what they mean is "the team I bet on didn't win".
 
.-.
I mean, the fairest is the Premier League - everyone plays everyone else home and home and then the champion has the most points. But were it not for things like the champions league, the Europa league and relegation, almost nobody would have anything to play for in the last two months and it’d be super boring.

People remember (sigh) George Mason. Florida beat them and then beat ucla in the final. For the life of me I couldn’t remember who UCLA beat in the final four. It was LSU - so I’m sure LSU fans remember since they don’t get there very often. But they added nothing to the storyline.

People will remember Florida Atlantic but nobody will remember Miami. Hell, Cam yesterday when he lit up the Clippers pointed at their bench and said “you better get him off me” - the guy (Miller) played on that Miami team and I was like “oh yeah”
 
Joel klatt takes aim at the NCAA tournament and misses by a mile:

1) march madness is the best tourney in all of sports.
2) how is it the least fair? because the winner of each conference title gets an auto bid? that makes it more fair not less fair.
 
Last edited:
I can follow his logic if his point is that the college football playoff shouldn't be modeled after March Madness. I'd actually agree with him there. They are two very different sports with much different levels of variance on a game to game basis. Your average 14-seed might beat the 3-seed one out of ten times in basketball, but that's still probably once more than the college football equivalent of a 14-seed would beat, say, Oregon over the same sample.

But to take aim at the NCAA Tournament like he does shows me that he's just a guy that doesn't get it. Anyone who thinks the NCAA Tournament should be the literal 68 best teams isn't worth taking seriously.

Also, this notion of "fairness" bothers me, because one could easily make the argument, as @Gurleyman just did, that postseason tournaments are by definition unfair and arbitrary no matter how many teams qualify. Last year we watched Ohio State lose to first place Oregon (in addition to Michigan) en route to a third place finish in the Big Ten, only to get another crack at them because of the expanded playoff. How is that fair? The NCAA Tournament may not always crown the best team either, but at least it's honest about what it is.
 
.-.
Normally I wouldn’t even respond to such stupidity from the media but the last few weeks have been diabolical. If there were any doubt that the P2 are trying to absorb all of the resources in ALL sports, look no further. They are literally trying to argue that the ncaa tournament, the most egalitarian system in all of sports, is somehow invalid because “the best team doesn’t always win,” even though it’s almost always a high major/1 seed winning it. They are saying the quiet part out loud. They want a super league.
 
Soul-less take. We're not going to see many cinderellas make runs anyway. There is one mid major that has anything anymore - Gonzaga.
 
RuffRuff said:
Soul-less take. We're not going to see many cinderellas make runs anyway. There is one mid major that has anything anymore - Gonzaga.
Expand ...
We never had a lot of final 4 runs from non-P5's but in 2023 we had two non-P5 programs in the final 4, only the second time I've ever seen that in my lifetime. We'll always have the early round upsets and we'll still get the occasional non-P5 going on a deep run.
 
.-.
superjohn said:
We never had a lot of final 4 runs from non-P5's but in 2023 we had two non-P5 programs in the final 4, only the second time I've ever seen that in my lifetime. We'll always have the early round upsets and we'll still get the occasional non-P5 going on a deep run.
Expand ...
Wild when you think about how much it swung in two years, from SDSU & FAU in the F4 to the most chalk tournament Elite 8 through finals we ever saw. The landscape has shifted fast.

I'm honestly not sure how many early round upsets we'll see from mid majors going forward. They've become a minor league system for the P4. Take a look at last years bracket - mid major making round of 32:

11 Drake over Mizzou
10 New Mexico over Marquette
7 StM over 10 Vandy (higher seed so not really a cinderella)
11 McNeese over Clemson (legit cinderella)
12 CSU over mid major Memphis (doesn't really count)

And that is it. None of these teams got to the S16. That is literally cinderella-less. I'd call that 1 legit cinderella win as the other were either tight seeds, higher seeds or beat another mid major.
 
RuffRuff said:
Wild when you think about how much it swung in two years, from SDSU & FAU in the F4 to the most chalk tournament Elite 8 through finals we ever saw. The landscape has shifted fast.

I'm honestly not sure how many early round upsets we'll see from mid majors going forward. They've become a minor league system for the P4. Take a look at last years bracket - mid major making round of 32:

11 Drake over Mizzou
10 New Mexico over Marquette
7 StM over 10 Vandy (higher seed so not really a cinderella)
11 McNeese over Clemson (legit cinderella)
12 CSU over mid major Memphis (doesn't really count)

And that is it. None of these teams got to the S16. That is literally cinderella-less. I'd call that 1 legit cinderella win as the other were either tight seeds, higher seeds or beat another mid major.
Expand ...
Last season was just a very chalk year. I expect it to be pretty chalk as well with the top seeds when it's all said and done this tournament too but the minor league system thing cuts both ways. Mid-majors will continue to lose much more top players than ever before because of the transfer portal but mid-majors will also be getting much more 4 star recruits than ever before...

So while you'll have less continuity with mid-major rosters you'll also have more talent on mid-major rosters. One thing that's obviously hurt mid-major programs is that there's just less of them now with the power 5 basketball conferences getting bigger and absorbing more of the mid-major schools.
 
RuffRuff said:
Wild when you think about how much it swung in two years, from SDSU & FAU in the F4 to the most chalk tournament Elite 8 through finals we ever saw. The landscape has shifted fast.

I'm honestly not sure how many early round upsets we'll see from mid majors going forward. They've become a minor league system for the P4. Take a look at last years bracket - mid major making round of 32:

11 Drake over Mizzou
10 New Mexico over Marquette
7 StM over 10 Vandy (higher seed so not really a cinderella)
11 McNeese over Clemson (legit cinderella)
12 CSU over mid major Memphis (doesn't really count)

And that is it. None of these teams got to the S16. That is literally cinderella-less. I'd call that 1 legit cinderella win as the other were either tight seeds, higher seeds or beat another mid major.
Expand ...
Mid-majors will need to learn how to be the minor leagues. They may develop guys and lose them, but they can also pull up strong players from low majors or D2 (Jack Grodahl) or bring down disgruntled P5 players who are salivating for more playing time (and then maybe have to send them back to a different P5 once they prove themselves).
 
Gurleyman said:
Mid-majors will need to learn how to be the minor leagues. They may develop guys and lose them, but they can also pull up strong players from low majors or D2 (Jack Grodahl) or bring down disgruntled P5 players who are salivating for more playing time (and then maybe have to send them back to a different P5 once they prove themselves).
Expand ...
True, but easier said than done and even so, unlikely to compete with high D1.
 
superjohn said:
So while you'll have less continuity with mid-major rosters you'll also have more talent on mid-major rosters.
Expand ...
While this may be true based on where players' were rated coming out of high school, I don't think it means much. It can be difficult to project what a 16 or 17 year old prospect is going to look like at 20 or 21, and that uncertainty has traditionally benefitted smaller schools with smaller recruiting budgets. All the portal does is allow the players to be re-ranked every offseason, making the market much more efficient and putting the schools' with bigger wallets at a massive advantage. And it's not just mid-majors paying the price, either. Look at Michigan this year - they have transfers from Illinois, OSU, UCLA, UNC, etc. It's gross.
 
superjohn said:
We never had a lot of final 4 runs from non-P5's but in 2023 we had two non-P5 programs in the final 4, only the second time I've ever seen that in my lifetime. We'll always have the early round upsets and we'll still get the occasional non-P5 going on a deep run.
Expand ...

I somewhat remember reading how ratings show fans like Cinderella in first and second weekend, but by the Final Four you need name programs to get the big ratings numbers.
 
.-.
champs99and04 said:
While this may be true based on where players' were rated coming out of high school, I don't think it means much. It can be difficult to project what a 16 or 17 year old prospect is going to look like at 20 or 21, and that uncertainty has traditionally benefitted smaller schools with smaller recruiting budgets. All the portal does is allow the players to be re-ranked every offseason, making the market much more efficient and putting the schools' with bigger wallets at a massive advantage. And it's not just mid-majors paying the price, either. Look at Michigan this year - they have transfers from Illinois, OSU, UCLA, UNC, etc. It's gross.
Expand ...
Yeah, we disagree. That's not all the portal does.
 
Chin Diesel said:
I somewhat remember reading how ratings show fans like Cinderella in first and second weekend, but by the Final Four you need name programs to get the big ratings numbers.
Expand ...
For sure.
 
Wow, I don’t know when or how he wound up discussing the NCAA tournament. Some context would be interesting.

He ought to stay in his lane, because he’s generally otherwise been spot on about the NCAA, its general idiocy, the eventual break of the power conferences from the NCAA, and the CFP. Plus he clowns Colin Cowherd just about every time he comes on his show. What an embarrassing take.
 
.-.
champs99and04 said:
I can follow his logic if his point is that the college football playoff shouldn't be modeled after March Madness. I'd actually agree with him there. They are two very different sports with much different levels of variance on a game to game basis. Your average 14-seed might beat the 3-seed one out of ten times in basketball, but that's still probably once more than the college football equivalent of a 14-seed would beat, say, Oregon over the same sample.

But to take aim at the NCAA Tournament like he does shows me that he's just a guy that doesn't get it. Anyone who thinks the NCAA Tournament should be the literal 68 best teams isn't worth taking seriously.

Also, this notion of "fairness" bothers me, because one could easily make the argument, as @Gurleyman just did, that postseason tournaments are by definition unfair and arbitrary no matter how many teams qualify. Last year we watched Ohio State lose to first place Oregon (in addition to Michigan) en route to a third place finish in the Big Ten, only to get another crack at them because of the expanded playoff. How is that fair? The NCAA Tournament may not always crown the best team either, but at least it's honest about what it is.
Expand ...
The only real issue I have with it is conference tournaments deciding the automatic qualifier. That’s a bad idea that often eliminates worthy teams. If you eliminated that we’d have no bad teams in the field.
 
Jaydumo20 said:
1st weekend is the best weekend in sports. I'm a blue blood fan and even I dont want to see all top seeds win.
Expand ...
It's by far the best 4 days in sports and always has been. Whole offices get into it, people take off work that Thursday and Friday every year for it, people fly out with old friends to Vegas every year to hit the sports book or fly out every year wherever their school is playing, everyone fills out their brackets whether they follow sports/college basketball or not etc.

Those first few days are all about the Cinderella. Bars are packed all over with everyone pulling for the little guy to take down the big dog. That's by far the most fun part of the tournament unless you're the fan from the major school seeing your team get taken down in real time or unless your team is going to the final 4.

The only comparable thing is the Super Bowl. The Super Bowl of course gets the most viewers and people lobby for it to be a national holiday but most people just meet up at someone's house and they're really in it for the food and commercials.
 
Chin Diesel said:
I somewhat remember reading how ratings show fans like Cinderella in first and second weekend, but by the Final Four you need name programs to get the big ratings numbers.
Expand ...
Curb Your Enthusiasm Bingo GIF by Jason Clarke


Nailed it. Cindarellas for the most part have fans cheer for them because they are the lovable underdog and fans want to see David take down Goliath. But Cindarellas by their definition are the smaller schools and don't have many organic fans in their fan bases and therefore don't bring that many fans for the Final Four TV/online viewing and won't create big ratings because of that. The TV execs want the big brand names, they want to see Goliath vs Goliath generally speaking.
 
gsmooth said:
Curb Your Enthusiasm Bingo GIF by Jason Clarke


Nailed it. Cindarellas for the most part have fans cheer for them because they are the lovable underdog and fans want to see David take down Goliath. But Cindarellas by their definition are the smaller schools and don't have many organic fans in their fan bases and therefore don't bring that many fans for the Final Four TV/online viewing and won't create big ratings because of that. The TV execs want the big brand names, they want to see Goliath vs Goliath generally speaking.
Expand ...

How does taking more 6-12 SEC or Big 12 teams impact that outcome?
 
HuskyHawk said:
The only real issue I have with it is conference tournaments deciding the automatic qualifier. That’s a bad idea that often eliminates worthy teams. If you eliminated that we’d have no bad teams in the field.
Expand ...
It happens to one or two a year, but the low major regular season champions are still going to be smushed for the most part. The ones who are good enough to add value to the tourney usually have a good enough resume to get in anyway - but it is true there is a small subset of teams ranked around 50 that have to win their tourneys that sometimes get left out when they have potential.

The plus to the conference tournaments is that they essentially give everyone a chance to get in. If the regular season winner made it, you’d have a little bit of the reverse effect - teams that were injured, or hadn’t figured stuff out, in January and couldn’t climb out of the hole they’d fallen in … even though they were playing better at the end of the year than the teams in front of them.

I’ve thought a little more could be done with byes maybe so that the No. 1 seed advances to the semis or something like that to add more value to the regular season. But conferences determine their format for themselves.
 
.-.
The Big Dance is the best sporting event of the year. He does have a point though. It is not the best way to crown a champion. The champion has to win 6 games in a row to win it all and basketball is ripe for big upsets. You get a Cinderella team with a couple of hot players and they can knock off a favorite.
 
Joel Klatt should stick to football its what he's okay at.


This take is one of the dumbest. Anyone remember the story of Goliath and Goliath. Nobody wants to see cinderellas? Everyone wants to see the little guy rise up and take down the big guy. UMBC and FDU will live forever in tournament history, St Peters making a run to the elite 8, Loyola Chicago and sister jean making a run to the final four. Hell 40 years later and people still take about the perfect game where the Ewing led lead hoyas got taken down by villinova. Danny and the miracle in 1988. That young baby faced kid from Davidson I forget his name taking his team all the way to the elite 8 in 2008.


I would argue the teams that make the 68 team field do way more to earn their way into the tournament. Look at the scheduling done by the top teams this year in bball where teams are looking schedule themselves against other top teams and in football you have people arguing well now the top teams wont schedule one another because its too much of a risk to their playoff chances. Football; lets get rid of out conference championship games because they might hurt us. Basketball; lets
 
.-.
I love the 64 team tournament. It’s the best playoffs in sports. As far as underdogs go, who didn’t enjoy watching Florida Gulf Coast rocking the tourney as just one example. It refreshing to get reminded that it’s not all about the power conferences. Even when a lower division teams lost it was often a revelation to see some crazy good players and standout individual performances. But those players probably wouldn’t have been on those teams if the current portal rules were already implemented earlier because they would have moved up to the a power conference team.
 
HuskyHawk said:
The only real issue I have with it is conference tournaments deciding the automatic qualifier. That’s a bad idea that often eliminates worthy teams. If you eliminated that we’d have no bad teams in the field.
Expand ...

The automatic qualifier eliminates bubble teams not worthy teams. If they were worthy they wouldn't be on the bubble. The automatic qualifiers often don't have the resume to be selected for the tourney, but they may be very good, it's just hard to judge.

Besides this idiot doesn't care about getting the best teams, it's about getting another 15 million dollars for the SEC or B10.
 
Klatt was a solid football player and baseball player, but his knowledge, or lack thereof, in NCAA basketball, which he knows ZERO about, or so it seems
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Forum statistics

Threads
168,921
Messages
4,602,979
Members
10,510
Latest member
Dawg4Life


.
.
Top Bottom