King, first off I agree with you when you say this is a great sporting event that seems to deliver every year. What I disagree with is that the second round or the "beat down round" was any different this year than previous years.

Recent history shows us that there is usually 3-5 higher seeded teams that make the Sweet 16. In fact, every year since 1997 has yielded either 3, 4 or 5 teams seeded 7 or higher to reach this round.

This may happen every year but it seems that media folk like you are fawning over the underdogs this year more than past years.

Like I said, it's still a great tourney but just not a oh-my-gosh-i've-never-seen-anything-like-it tourney. This happens every year.

Although Nantz is a bit of a bore, its nothing compared to Musberger. He is one of the most obnoxious and grating people ever to speak into a microphone--h$ll give me Clark Kellog over Brent

Agree with the fuss about the timeouts. Make the rule more simple and more elegant. Timeouts can only be called by a player if he is in bounds and in control of the ball. Timeouts can only be called from the bench if the ref can hear the call.

For Lute and co., that's just tough luck - as a practical matter on loud courts, the bench should be allowed to call a timeout in case the players can't be heard as long as the ball is in their possession and under their control. Which includes jump shots in action - how can a shot on goal be in play if it was not under control as a field goal attempt? The tautological truth of this sentence says more about the English language than it does about the rules of basketball. Arizona got unlucky.

The first rule change should be the possesion arrow. Talk about arbitrary and talk about simple and elegant solutions to avoiding penalizing good defense. Puhleeze. As much as I despise ACC snobs like Vitale and Packer, Dickie "that's delivery pizza Baby" V is right aobut the possesion arrow: It needs to go.

As to half-court violations, it's good where it stands now. As a a fan of the full-court press and zone defense, any change to the half-court rule would make casualties of both. But in case there is a change, one should be willing to introduce a sixth-man on the court as a place-kicker.

I like some of the suggestions vis-a-vis the timeout, primarily because I hate dragging out the game, and giving television all those extra commercials.

I would be in favor of eliminating the backcourt violation altogether. After all, the whole point in to score a basket, which is almost impossible from the backcourt. And with a shot clock, there is no incentive to use the entire court as a stalling technique, since stalling is restricted to 35 seconds anyway.

Packer and Nance are OK, just as the rest of them are. In this day and age, basketball is primarily a game of individual athletic accomplishment, so the announcers are irrelevant. They almost never tell the viewer anything they haven't seen on the screen, and can intuitively understand.

Note to King. There is basketball, then there is women's basketball. Because the are only marginally related, they should never be discussed in the same article.

So it looks like pretty much no one, myself included, likes the timeout-while-diving-out-of-bounds rule (weren't refs supposed to be going a little tougher on this a couple years back?) But I have to disagree with King on another of his complaints, calling timeout on an inbounds play.

It seems to me that doing that is analagous to football, where an offense can call timeout if the play clock's about to expire or the defense suddenly jumps into something the QB doesn't recognize. No one seems too concerned about that, so why is it such a big deal if a player calls a timeout to avoid a 5-second call on an inbound?

As for Billy Packer, count me among the haters. He knows the game, no question, but I always feel as though he's trying to make sure we know how much he knows. And I can't stand the way he sometimes picks out one minor aspect of a game and harps on it repeatedly (did anyone see all the alleged palming violations he did during Arizona-Villanova?). It feels like Nantz is his enabler sometimes, too, never calling on him to defend his position.

Thanks for clarifying the thing about the end line--that was confusing. I still don't like the idea, though. It'll create a situation where the defender just tries to poke the ball away--I don't think that's enough of a defensive play to be rewarded with possession. As it stands, it's a live, loose ball, and if th defense can get to it first, it's theirs. That seems like quite enough of a reward.

>>>>"...which I picked on the theory that it's rarely a terrible idea to go against Florida in the NCAA Tournament.">>>>

i hope you are currently eating those words, eat them again when the gators crush georgetown, and when they make it to teh final four befor epossibly beating uconn to go to the championship! the fact that you keep judging this team on the past 4 years teams' play is a trvesty

as a florida fan, when we get on CBS, we always get these two guys. i like them. billy packer reminds me of a nice grandpa who happens to know a lot a basketball. it's only at tourney time, as you get all the randoms coming out of the CBS broadcaster woodwork, that i see how much better these guys are than most.

My use of the word "end line" seems to be confusing readers, so once again, for those who haven't read all the way back to the start of the letters: All I meant was that if the ball goes over the 10-second line, it's a backcourt violation if the offense recovers it, regardless of who touched it last. If the defense touches it first, it's a live ball. If the offense touches it first, it's a backcourt violation. The only thing that would change is the rule "that's not a backcourt violation because the defense touched it last" would go away.

nhogan: Any thoughts? Should a team be allowed to opt-out of shooting free throws in a bonus situation, if they'd prefer the chance to inbound?

I'm all for anything that reduces free throws, so yes. My actual solution, stunning in its elegance and brilliance, is to eliminate free throws.