There has been much banter about whether or not the Memphis Tigers would be better off not entering the NCAA tournament undefeated. And, the prevailing opinion seems to be: yes, they would be better suited to winning a national title if they were to lose a game in the regular season. The most common reasons stated for this are:
- There would be less pressure on them in the tournament if they were only chasing a national title instead of both the title and a perfect season.
- With a loss, they might avoid being the “#1 target” of every team on their schedule.
- It is important to know “what it feels like to lose” in order to really put in your best effort to avoid that feeling and to appreciate how important winning really is.
I could not disagree more with these or any other reason why Memphis would be better off losing. Let us take the reasons above one at a time.
First of all, in response to the added “pressure” of being undefeated, I think this is the most ridiculous one of all–and it just happens to be the most popular. These are 18-22 year old AMATEUR basketball players who eat, sleep and breathe the game of basketball. They have never won an NCAA championship. In fact, they play for a coach who, despite 400+ career wins, a .750 winning percentage and a national coach of the year award, has never won an NCAA title. And, all of this is at a school that, despite a strong basketball history and institutional commitment to the sport, has never won an NCAA basketball championship.
When adding all of these things together, I believe there is such a thing as “terminal pressure,” in that adding even more things on top of a tournament run will not increase the pressure that these kids feel in March. Say Memphis wins their first 3 tournament games and is playing on March 30 for a chance at the Final Four. Do you think that these kids will feel any more pressure if they are 36-0 than if they were 35-1? Either way, this game is the biggest game that any of these players have ever played. Can it get any “bigger” than the biggest ever? Can you feel any more pressure than the “game of your life,” which it would be regardless of the number of losses they have suffered?
The response to the second reason stated above is similar to the first. Yes, being undefeated makes it harder to win regular season games because every team shows up to play you. They have your game circled on their calendar. UAB and Houston and Tulane know that the best way to make their season count is to knock off number one. So, yes, being undefeated makes regular season wins harder. However, we are talking about the tournament. Is there any team out there that is not going to be “up” for a tournament game? If you need the fact that your opponent is undefeated in order to bring your best game in the NCAA TOURNAMENT, then you should probably rethink your commitment to your sport. Yes, being undefeated brings the best out of your opponent, but so does playing in the NCAA Tournament, so that should have no additional effect on the difficulty involved in winning an NCAA title.
Finally, the third reason stated above may be somewhat valid, but ought to be tempered by several factors. Number one, they have an experienced, intelligent, highly astute coach guiding the ship. Being undefeated may make Coach Calipari’s job a little harder, but I trust the fact that he can do this job and make it so that it does not affect his players.
Secondly, the big concern here is the overconfidence with being undefeated. I think that the concerns with overconfidence bring no more negative than the positive gained by being confident. If Memphis does finish the regular season undefeated, they will have beaten 7 teams that are likely to be in the tournament field (Oklahoma, UConn, USC, Georgetown, Arizona, Gonzaga and Tennessee). This will more than make up for all the talk they have to hear about how bad Conference USA is (a very much overstated opinion) because they know that they have been tested and that, on those given days, they have proven better than some of the best team in the country. I believe that this confidence of being undefeated more than makes up for the negative associated with possibly being overconfident.
Finally, with all the talk of “needing to know what losing feels like,” people seem to forget that this tournament is a one-and-done tournament. It does not matter how you handle losing because once you do lose, your season is over. It is not like Memphis has to learn how to “bounce back” from a loss because one loss and their season (and most of their careers) are over.
All in all, I know that no one is advocating the Memphis roll over and lose one intentionally, but many people are stating that they would be better off if they did not enter the Tournament undefeated. I disagree. The bright lights of the Tournament are bright enough to overwhelm 19-year old amateur athletes–adding “history” is not going to make the most important 3 weeks of their lives any more important. And, while they are at it, isn’t it everyone’s goal to “make history” by winning a championship? So, why wouldn’t that goal of “making history” be even more impressive if it was done without a loss?
Here’s the point you missed, and I think we only need look back to the SuperBowl to see an example of it…at some point during the year even great teams are gonna come out flat, have things go against them, have off nights. The line of thinking would be better to get that out of your system before you are in a one-and-done situation. Now, some teams fight through those off-nights when the Sports Gods just seem to be against you and win in spite of that. But more often then not, once in a while you come out flat, have an off night, and take an L. Which is why is is super rare that teams run the table. I know I would feel much more comfortable picking Memphis to go real deep if they dropped one going in. Maybe thats just me, I do think they are a final four team, but I wouldnt be super comfortable working under the assumption they are just gonna keep piling up W’s.
Ian, good point and the Super Bowl comparison is one that I’ve heard a lot and I didn’t explicitly address in the column. But, my response to the Super Bowl comparison is two-fold:
(a) The Patriots–and most of the guys on that team this year–had already reached that pinnacle. So, this year’s Super Bowl may not have been considered the “biggest game of their careers.” It may be tied, but it isn’t like these Memphis guys in the Final Four
(b) Even more significantly, I think, is the fact that NFL players (though fierce competitors, of course) are professional athletes. I’m not saying, by any means, that professional athletes don’t care about winning and losing, but Tom Brady goes home after that game and he is still making a hefty paycheck. He is still dating supermodels. He still has multi-million dollar endorsement deals and Pebble Beach Pro-Ams to go to. He is not risking “who he is” on the outcome of a game. On the other hand, amateur, college athletes (with a few exceptions–O.J. Mayo and company) are defined by how the play. They are not paid (theoretically) and are living in dorm rooms. Basketball, at this level, is their whole life, so the pressure of the quest for a title on the Memphis Tigers is already at its peak. Yes, I think that the Patriots felt the pressure of 19-0 and I think it added to the pressure of just winning a Super Bowl. I don’t think it’s an apt comparison, though, when you’re talking about amateur student-athletes.
About the “off-night” theory. I agree 100%. It is so incredibly tough to go through an entire season without an “off-night.” This is why being undefeated is so impressive. My only problem with this theory, though, is that just because you have an “off-night” late in the regular season does not mean you are any less likely to have one in the tournament. It’s not like you have one every 25 games and you just hope it comes in February and not March. No, they just happen and having one today does not make you any more or less likely to have one tomorrow.
Bry, I wasnt making the Superbowl point about pressure, because big spots are big spots and thats gonna happen. I was making the comparision because those off nights eventually sneak up and beat you. The Pats escaped against Baltimore and Philly, and had to battle back the first time against the Giants. They made enough plays to beat the beat-up Chargers. But my point is eventually even great teams are gonna lose on off-nites. And I take you statement, “just because you have an “off-night” late in the regular season does not mean you are any less likely to have one in the tournament”. For great team, I think it does. I dont think great teams have off nights all that frequently. I do think they all have them. So if I a big Memphis fan I am saddened and disappointed, but possibly a little relieved, if and when they drop one before the big dance. Without being close to eying a bracket, I would say Memphis is a final four team. But that being said, I would feel way better picking them if Tenn upsets them tomorrow nite.
Bry, I completely agree with everything you’ve said here. I have an analogy for the point of “just because you have an off-night late in the regular season doesn’t mean you are less likely to have one in the tourney”. It’s like in roulette at a casino, just because the 22 hit twice in the last 3 spins, doesn’t mean it’s any less likely to hit on the next spin. It’s always the same probability. I think it’s the same with “off-nights”. It’s not like if you have an off-night late in the regular season you’re going to know exactly WHY you had that off-night. You have no idea and, therefore, can’t prevent it from happening again.
Really good points here. I’m convinced to never buy into this ‘they’re better off losing one’ talk, at least when it comes to college hoops. But probably in any sport, even the NFL. I can see the value of playing close games, but not losing.
Pingback: OnMemphis » Blog Archive » Still bleeding blue