Four frantic days of March Madness are in the books, and now it’s time for the fun: stepping back and assessing the grades for how some teams fared (and failed).
I’m going to be your instructor for this exercise, so let me set some ground rules first.
- Rule #1: There are no curves I will grade on. I’m not going to rate Kentucky on any different scale than, say, Fairleigh Dickinson. That would be totally unfairleigh for everyone involved.
- Rule #2: These grades are based solely on the first weekend of the 2023 NCAA tournament. I don’t care that Houston lost to Temple in January or that Creighton was on a six-game losing streak late last year. That’s not one of my criteria. This is not a power ranking. It’s a testimony.
All fair play is is what teams have done — or, in some cases, haven’t, during their time on the NCAA tournament field. This is an example of a game for some, two games for top scores. My criteria are solely based on mood and performance with a strong bias towards mood. So if you have problems with the report card, please wait until the teachers’ conferences. Just know that I’m not going to split my rubric and, no, I’m not going to round your team’s 69 up to 70. i’m not that nice
OK. Let’s dive into the sheet music.