Intentions and consequence

March Madness begins today, in a different time and place. Sometime after noon I'll go to some chain joint with wall-to-wall TVs, and the bar will be wall-to-wall with folks playing hooky from work, and we'll all eat wings and drink tall beers and cheer for schools that, until this week, we barely knew existed.

Look, it's Wofford! It's Stephen F. Austin! It's that's school with the name like a color (Siena)! Man, who knew these guys could play?

March Madness begins today, in a different time and place. In this time and place, however ...

Well. You know.

No Madness. No One Shining Moment. No Moments at all for the kids who played all season for this, and especially for the seniors who'll never play for it again.

And even if there are much larger considerations in the nation these days, it's entirely appropriate to feel for those kids. The NCAA poobahs say it's those kids who made it such a tough decision to close it all down, and there is no reason to doubt them. On some level they actually do care for the welfare of the "student-athlete", even if they so often act directly against that welfare.

And so the narrative, in this last week, has become some version of this: We should grant our seniors another year eligibility to make up for this. Because what if you're a senior who's never gotten to play in the tournament, and you worked four years and finally earned a spot in the field, and then this happens?

It's a heartfelt argument. To which the Blob would reply: But what about all the seniors who never got to go Dancin'? Who worked just as hard for four years as the aforementioned seniors, but whose teams just never were good enough?

And, sure, I get it, that's not quite the same thing. But missing out is still missing out, even if you don't miss out because of a literally unimaginable circumstance. It still hurts.

So there's that. There's also this: The unintended consequences that sometimes come with acting purely on emotion.

Because of if you grant your seniors another year of eligibility, that's two or three or however many scholarships you won't have for next season. And what if those schollys aren't available? Do you then change not only one rule but two, expanding the number of allowable scholarships?

The Blob didn't think this one up by itself, mind you. Lots of people have, in the last week. And no one lays it out more clearly than the estimable Gregg Doyel of the Indianapolis Star does here.

All those seniors who won't get to Dance?

Sucks.

Not being able to make it not suck without unintended consequences?

Sucks even worse.