Of the many questions one can conjure up entering a season (Who’s the national title favorite? Why is Team XYZ only a 7 seed and not a 6 in someone’s preseason bracketology? How much more hideous can court designs get?), all of them take on a trivial quality this year, even more than they ever might have in the past.
Lurking high over any and all unknowns this coming college basketball season, and probably future ones too, is this: just how many teams are going to be affected by the FBI’s investigation into the sport, and how badly will those teams feel pain-if they do at all?
The Federal Bureau of Investigation’s probe into college hoops is the great variable that could do anything from merely making some nervous for a while, to costing coaches jobs, to flipping the sport’s balance of power on its head-or could do virtually nothing at all. It has the potential to reshape seasons and programs. But who knows who it will hit, and how badly.
In the immediate, the 2017-18 campaign could wind up wildly different at the end from what might’ve been expected at the start. News could come out at any time, and the toll it might take on teams in the middle of the season is impossible to measure.
It’s entirely possible that a number of programs considered national title contenders could be heavily affected. Some already have.
Louisville, of course, has already seen its program and athletic department in chaos, with the firing of head coach Rick Pitino (plus athletic director Tom Jurich). Several of Pitino’s assistants also were put on leave, resulting in David Padgett-not long ago the junior assistant on the coaching staff-suddenly in place as interim head coach.
Among those presumably sweating now, Arizona was considered a nearly universal top-five pick entering the season, but there’s a distinct dark cloud over the program now with former assistant coach Emmanuel (Book) Richardson among those named in the FBI investigation. At this point, the school is riding it out with head coach Sean Miller, but it’s not hard to think that could change at any time, depending on just what Richardson or others might tell the FBI.
USC is a red-hot preseason favorite, returning everyone from an athletic, experienced and flashy team. But assistant coach Tony Bland has been another named, and rumors swirling are that De’Anthony Melton has been held out of preseason scrimmages so far, perhaps because of a possible role in the scandal.
Miami (Fla.) is another chic pick for a big season, but the Hurricanes have confirmed they’re under investigation by the FBI. The school insists it’s innocent, but it could find out soon that the FBI is going to be a little tougher to evade than the NCAA.
Among others, Auburn is now holding out Danjel Purifoy and Austin Wiley during the investigation, two of its more important players. Without them, the Tigers lost an exhibition game against NCAA Division II Barry (Fla.) and could quickly put a chink in the armor of an SEC that is expected to be much improved.
Those are just some of the programs we know now. How many more could be implicated? When will they? Or will more be implicated at all?
It’s easy to be jaded by the billions of dollars in revenues in college sports and think that non-profits with massive budgets and so intent on monopolizing money and power aren’t going to let this go without attempting to exercise some lobbying. Then again, one also tends to think the FBI is not an organization to be trifled with.
The bombshell announcing the investigation rattled this sport, but it’s possible it may have been the first of several like it. We just don’t know, and other than the FBI’s initial, foreboding announcement, we don’t even know that much right now.
That might make some people or schools nervous. And it could create upheaval in the 2017-18 season different from anything seen during a season before. With an emphasis on ‘could.’
Other quick hitter questions as we head into the season:
Where does North Carolina go next? The Tar Heels won the national title a year ago and appeared in the title game each of the past two years. UNC didn’t look affected in the least by the NCAA’s investigation into academic misconduct those years, so assuming that a load has been lifted with the resolution of that is likely folly. Far more concerning is the loss of three double-digit scorers, including ACC Player of the Year Justin Jackson, plus an injury that will keep point guard Joel Barry out for a time early this year. Still, the Heels were so deep last year-and have reloaded this year with newcomers like freshman Jalek Felton-that anything less than a top 20 ranking or an extended run in the NCAA tourney will likely be a disappointment. Another Final Four run? It won’t be expected, but let’s be honest: it also wouldn’t exactly shock the masses, either.
How do the rent-a-freshmen work out for Duke and Kentucky? This could be an annual question for these two now. The Blue Devils are preseason No. 1 for many based solely on their freshmen (let’s be real-it’s not because of the returning cast from a team that was knocked out of the NCAA Tournament in the second round). Kentucky is practically an expansion team this year, so little experience does it return, yet UK still is in almost everyone’s top five. We’ve pointed it out in the past, though, and we’ll say it again: no matter how touted recruits are and no matter how many congregate at one place, there’s no guarantee of monster success for those teams. In fact, if the expectation is a national championship, increasingly the evidence is showing these teams underwhelm.
Are expectations too high for Michigan State? There are seemingly a dozen teams like this every year, ones that return just about everyone, including an expected star, and add some talented newcomers, therefore are predicted for a monster season…except they weren’t that good a year ago. The young Spartans lost 15 games last year and didn’t get into the NCAA Tournament by much. Yes, they were young and should get better. Yes, they were badly hampered by injuries and should get a boost with the return of several big men who missed the season due to injury (resulting in a depleted frontline). Yes, Miles Bridges looks like a star in the making. But all of those outcomes are not a given.
How good is USC? Along similar lines as Michigan State, the Trojans are one of the chic picks to make a Final Four run, returning about just everyone from a team with some noted talent-Shaqquan Aaron, Bennie Boatwright, Chemzie Metu and Elijah Stewart all thought about going pro after last year before deciding to return. It seems to be almost forgotten: USC barely squeaked into the NCAA Tournament a year ago, fattening up on a friendly non-conference schedule to start 14-0 before winning just over half of their Pac-12 games. Then again, four of their Pac-12 losses came when Boatwright was injured for a long stretch of the season. Then again, four more of them came after he was back. The point is, with so much experience and athleticism, there’s a good chance USC is a top 15 team this year, maybe even top 10. But there’s enough evidence from last year to show that it’s no sure thing, and a squad that winds up a 7 or 8 seed in the NCAAs isn’t out of the question, either.
Does Louisville really need a coach? Of course, that question is asked in jest and is not fair in the least to interim coach David Padgett. (From working in college athletics, will tell anyone being an interim coach is no picnic, especially the work behind the scenes). It is a fact, though, that if one gets by the horrendous timing, Padgett is taking over a team that has substantial talent. The Cardinals-led by Deng Adel and Quentin Snider and with size and athletes everywhere-were picked sixth in Blue Ribbon Yearbook’s top 25 compiled before the FBI probe was announced, and even after Rick Pitino’s suspension and eventual firing and prize freshman Brian Bowen being held out, Louisville was ranked 16th in both the Associated Press and coaches polls. In a sport that has increasingly become a copy of the NBA, some will wonder just how much coaching impacts a team anymore if the Cardinals roll to 25 wins this season. And Louisville is talented enough to do just that.
Can Seton Hall develop some depth? For those of us who regularly miss the days when fans could get to know teams, Seton Hall is the antidote. The Pirates have a returning senior core of Khadeen Carrington, Angel Delgado, Desi Rodriguez and Ismael Sanogo that have been prominent players for the last two (and in some cases three) years, leading the Hall to contending status in the Big East and two straight NCAA Tournament appearances. One reason fans have gotten to know them so well, though, is because Kevin Willard’s team last year only went 7-8 deep. Whether we can see the four seniors for longer in March (they’re still looking for a win in the NCAAs) will likely depend on if they get more help, perhaps from freshmen like Myles Cale and Jordan Walker, or returnees like Michael Nzei and Myles Powell.
Might someone-anyone-end Kansas’s string of Big 12 championships? The Big 12 has been the best conference in the country over the last four years, even as huge NCAA Tournament success hasn’t always followed (Oklahoma’s 2016 Final Four a notable exception). Rugged and strong as the league has been, though, no one has been able to end the Jayhawks’ streak of regular season titles, now at 14. Kansas looks vulnerable this year-it loses the national player of the year plus another All-American, is light on depth, and is relying a lot on a transfer (Malik Newman) who had a somewhat disappointing first year at Mississippi State before transferring-but it looked vulnerable the last couple years too, and teams like Iowa State, Oklahoma and West Virginia couldn’t seize the top spot. The Bob Huggins-led Mountaineers are always a threat and TCU in Jamie Dixon’s second year has fascinating upside, but otherwise there are no glaring hot-take candidates to overtake KU.
Can the NCAA Tournament selection committee get over its big wins obsession and actually start evaluating teams’ entire seasons again? It’s not fun, really it’s not. The NCAA-imperfect as it is-regularly takes the bullets for blame that should be placed first on the member schools making its rules, so we don’t criticize it lightly. But the work of the selection committee the last three years has been subpar. The committee has put entirely too much emphasis on quantity of top 50 wins and all but officially ignored losses for those teams that have the most such wins, not coincidentally those who have the most money to buy non-conference home games and thus stack their conference schedules with high power rating opponents. The committee seemed to admit it needed some changes in this when it revised its team sheets this offseason to redefine a ‘quality win’ based on where games are played. But shouldn’t those on the committee-who we are regularly told spend huge amounts of time evaluating teams-been able to make such value judgments themselves? It must be called out: the committee needs to do a better job of evaluating entire schedules and understanding the strength of teams outside the BCS conferences.
Who is the next player to emerge from supposedly nowhere at Notre Dame? It’s become one of those early season rites of passage: someone from the Fighting Irish surprises everyone, significantly raising their production. While trumpeted as an example of coach Mike Brey’s genius in developing players, of course a lot of the credit goes to those players. Moreover, it just might be suggested that ND regularly has talented players lying in wait, except they don’t play much because of the tight rotation favored by Brey, who had four guys eating at least 32 minutes per game a year ago. Among those whose production could spike this year with more playing time are T.J. Gibbs, Martinas Geben or John Mooney. Or perhaps all three.
Is Wichita State a national title contender? The Shockers have moved on from the Missouri Valley Conference, and while they’ve settled in the American Athletic Conference, the hype train around them has kept right on trucking. To say the Shockers became an analytics darling the last two years would be like saying water is wet or Chick-Fil-A is delicious, a drastic understatement of the highest order. (It got so out of hand that some dramatically exaggerated that WSU last year was the most underseeded NCAA Tournament team ever…while certainly underrated, it probably wasn’t even the most egregiously blown seed in the field.) This year there’s talk about the Shockers as a Final Four favorite and even some saying they should be ranked No. 1 entering the season and THE national favorites. It’s a lot of ballyhoo about an outstanding program that, if some of those saying such things are being honest, they probably haven’t even seen play much, and are primarily rating based on computer formulas that reward margin of victory. All that said, from the perspective of one who has followed the MVC closely and seen the team play quite a bit: does Wichita State deserve it? Experience, defense, rebounding, depth (few build it better than Gregg Marshall) and exceptional three-point shooting say the Shockers do, but the real wild card will be how they handle what will presumably be more close games. WSU had few the last two years, and a less-than middling record when they did (4-8 in contests decided by six points or less; 53-6 in all others). If the AAC is as big a step up as many want to believe, then it’s imperative that the Shockers win more close games against a steadier diet of them.
Twitter: @HoopvilleAdam
Email: [email protected]
