If I'm VCU...

Not the whole college...just the basketball team.  VCU's run has been an incredible story but here are a few things they might be thinking about.  So without further adieu...

If I'm VCU, I'd be thinking...

A).  We were lucky to even be in the tournament at all

B).  That so far in the NCAA tournament, I have beaten at least one team from each major conference EXCEPT the SEC (oh look, there's Kentucky on the other side of the bracket).

C).  Two of the teams I beat were the first (Kansas) and second (Purdue) best teams in their conference (and except for a three minute span when Kansas closed to four, I beat them soundly).

D).  My team is coached by the second best young coach (Shaka Smart) in the country (and he's not THAT far behind Brad Stevens).

E).  My coach moves more when we are on defense than the actual players on the court

F).  All this chaos may have just single-handedly taken the NCAA tournament to the 96-team format.

Unfortunately, I would not be surprised if the major college coaches didn't use the Rams run from the play-in game to the Final Four as the smoking gun to take another run at changing the format to 96 teams.  VCU is the second #11 seed to reach the Final Four in five years (see Mason, George--2006) but with an added nuance this go-around.  They came from the play-in game as one of the last four entries into the tournament. 

The strongest argument to this point for not expanding past 68 teams was the quality of the play of teams 69-96.  Based on the ratings of the NIT and the quality of basketball in most of those NIT games, the argument seemed to play out (of course, who knew if the poor ratings meant no one really knew the quality of the games because no one was watching).  In the face of the weaker arguments--small ratio of teams making the tournament to eligible D-1 programs compared to the other NCAA sports, the great interest (huh?) fans would have in an expanded tournament, coaches losing their jobs for not making the tournament over a period of time (especially when consistently on the bubble) and, still denied by all involved to this day, money--quality of play was actually rock solid.

Poor quality of play stands out against the weaker arguments because if it is true, no one cares about the ratios, fans lose interest, coaches lose jobs and there is no money because no one is watching.  Knowing that VCU barely made the tournament and that they were seen, by many, as interchangeable with those wallowing in the NIT mist, their quality of play should have been poor, right?  What chance does any lower seed have to win anyway?  The lowest seed to win the tournament was #8 Villanova in 1985.

Double-digit seeds are never in the mix.  Sure, there's a couple Cinderellas in every tournament.  But those flames fizzle in the Sweet 16--the lucky ones get to the Elite 8.  Oh, and George Mason was a terrific story five years ago but it was bound to happen once, right?  That's not a reason to make a potentially catastrophic leap of faith by expanding 28 more teams.
But a second run, especially one as dynamic and decisive by VCU, coming only five years after the last time it happened, will turn heads.  It will raise eyebrows.  It will give a glimmer of hope to the blowhards in the NCAA who will jump at any chance to pick the pocket of any fan who is willing to go to "First Four" games just because their school was lucky enough to make the tournament.  Regardless of the quality of play.  Regardless of the true ability of that team to win the whole tournament.  If a team that didn't make the tournament could beat VCU, why can't that same team, if in the tourney as a #15 seed, make a similar run?

The one response to that is VCU is actually more than just a Cinderella.  Cinderella has a fairy godmother and a magic wand.  VCU has the three-pointer and no fear.  They are the Gonzaga of 2011.  A mid-major up-and-comer, winning games they "shouldn't" but doing it in a style that screams they should.  They are the Butler of 2012.  More established after its first run, still underrated and ranked low but maybe better than the year before.

They are not the final answer to a winning argument for 96 teams.

They are, instead, the epitome of why we love this tournament.

Peace,
Reg