If All's Well That Ends Well, College Basketball Is Doing Quite Well, Thank You

I could choose not to write this blog, and let the more standard blog posted this same evening/early morning on the incredibly dramatic final possessions that concluded one of the best NCAA championship games ever played be my only thoughts on Villanova's brilliant championship victory.

But since I have engaged in a diatribe about how awful this college basketball season has been, including a vicious critique of the semi-final games on Saturday, I feel the need to address my criticisms just after a championship game that could not have more starkly contradicted every observation I have made about the game based on the 2015-16 season and the NCAA tournament up until Monday night.

I would begin by asking if tonight's amazing game made the three previous weeks of "poorly played, non-competitive basketball" as I called it, worth the wait.

It's hard not to argue "yes."

It may be that the very reason we sit through long stretches of disappointing games and sub-par play is that sooner or later, one of the best games we will ever see takes place before our eyes.  And that's what it means not only to love sports, but to understand them and the humans who play and coach them.

The 2016 game between Villanova and UNC had it all.  Both teams got off to good starts, connecting from three-point range, and answering one another basket-for-basket right from tip-off.  Everybody came to play.  The early going showed that the championship game was going to be a refreshing relief from the really bad basketball 48 hours earlier.  The game was not going to be a blowout, and it was not going to be the display of bad shooting and dull play that was on display Saturday.

But the 2016 title game was far more than an improvement over Saturday's games: it was one of the best ever, including perhaps the most dramatic ending in NCAA championship game history, with each team hitting clutch threes in the final seconds:  UNC's Marcus Paige a double-clutch three to tie the game, and Villanova's Kris Jenkins a buzzer-beating three to win it just four seconds later.

If ever a game was meant for me to eat my words about the national semi-finals and the season that led up to it, this was it.

Even Indiana's one-point win over Syracuse in 1987, and UNC's one-point win over Georgetown in 1982  fall short of the 2016 title game, because those dramatic endings involved a mistake by one team rather than back-to-back clutch plays by both teams in the final seconds.  In '87, a missed front-end of a one-and-one by Syracuse's Derrick Coleman set up Keith Smart's game winning jumper for a one-point Hoosier win.  In 1982, Michael Jordan's clutch jumper to give UNC a one-point lead was followed up by an unforced, inexpiable turnover by a Georgetown player who just passed the ball to UNC's James Worthy as though Worthy were his teammate.  Even Villanova fans would probably agree that tonight's victory was even more amazing than the historic upset of Georgetown in the 1985 final.

No dramatic championship game I can recall ended with neither team making a mistake: a missed free-throw with a one-point lead or turnover when behind by one.  On the contrary, one team making an incredibly difficult, clutch shot, and the other following that one with a buzzer-beating three sets the 2016 championship game apart.  This game was college basketball's version of "Anything You Can Do, I Can Do Better."

I could nit-pick and find something to criticize.  But that would be in poor taste after such a great game.

I will give myself credit for ending my blog about Saturday's basketball debacle by pointing out that I did predict Villanova would win, and that I hoped the game had a chance to be well-played and would get the game back on track for improved play in the seasons to come.  Perhaps Saturday was a bottoming-out for the college game, and tonight was the night college basketball got its groove back, and then some.

It is worth noting, I think, that this championship Villanova team bares no resemblance to the pro-team blueprint of one-and-done players that have been the core of recent champions, in particular last year's Duke team and the 2012 Kentucky squad.  Villanova won because it could consistently score the ball, which was critical in a game when UNC hit a torrid 7-of-9 from three-point range in the first half yet only led 39-34 at halftime.  Without good shooters and front-line players who could score in the lane and knock down smooth baseline fade-aways, Villanova would have had a very rough night hanging with a UNC team that played as well as it could in the first half, and came back to earth in the second, when Villanova controlled the game until the Tar Heels' late rally.

Villanova got stops, rebounds, and loose balls when Carolina had chances to regain the lead in the second half as well.  And, of course, like any champion, when Villanova needed a big basket, or needed to make free throws, they came through time and again.  Villanova was not built around a single superstar but instead was a well-balanced team that had multiple offensive threats and could really shoot the ball.  Maybe this team will be the last of its kind.  Or maybe it is a timely reminder of what makes a great college basketball team--a team that plays to win the big games and make the big plays and is not put together to prepare for a lottery-pick press conference.  A team that reminds us the college game is a great game that can stand on its own and doesn't need to be a prep for the pros.

So the joke is on me.  I will leave it up to whatever readers are out there to decide what kind of shape college basketball is in, and whether or not tonight's game shows that I am too quick and extreme in my criticisms.  On the other hand,  I don't know how anyone could have watched college basketball this year up until tonight and not thought the game had seen better days.

I will say this, however.  The glory of championships fades quickly.  Hours before the game, a group of commentators including Jay Williams and Jay Bilas had an at-times contentious discussion about the ills of college basketball.  The issue of player compensation came up.  The argument was made that the college game needs to be more like the pro game, including a 24-second shot clock.  And the debate about the value of the college "experience," and how to keep players for more than one year was addressed.  These are difficult issues, and they will still be around when the euphoria of Kris Jenkins' game-winner and the rush of a truly great game have faded.

It is fair to say that this college basketball season featured a great many poorly played, non-competitive games.  Right now, just hours after one of the best college championship games ever played, it seems also fair to say that such games come with the territory, and if you really are a fan of the game, you don't give up on it, because legendary moments like Villanova's victory are the real marker of how great the game is.

I could say that my self-described "diatribe" about the game really means that I care about it so much and am pained to see the quality of play deteriorate and its institutional operations become such a farce.  But that would be a defense cop-out.  There is no denying that for all its faults and hypocrisy, college basketball gave us maybe its best game ever on Monday night.

But I do wonder: if it takes such a great game to equalize or even outshine a generally dull season, was tonight's championship game a clear sign the game is as good as ever, or was it college basketball's last hurrah?