NCAA men's basketball

The one-year and out setup, which means the only serious talents you're likely to see on in an NCAA game are unformed 18-year-olds who will be snapped up with by the NBA next year, and who you will never see grow in a college hoops context. Which means the product you're watching largely consists of innate talent without developed skills, and players with more coaching with lesser innate talents. Given the fact that my team attachments are vague to nil - I don't really care if Duke or NC wins the big game - it's only worth my time if the game is well-played.

The regular season has become a boring inconsequence. March Madness is different because of the stakes – put on 32 games in two days with only guys who play like me and there would still be a bunch of close games and a few buzzer beaters.  Though games can be hotly contested, even folks with a vested interest in the product are starting to acknowledge (ESPN’s Jay Bilas, for example) that this doesn’t mean that the teams or the sport compare to what we saw 20 years ago. In fact, the onslaught of games during the first round, the back and forth of similarly skilled players, makes the revelation – I’m watching the same game over and over.