The Big Dance: The Story of the NCAA Basketball Tournament by Barry Wilner

The Big Dance: The Story of the NCAA Basketball Tournament Reviews

• 
  Brant

  This review is based on a complimentary copy provided by the publisher through LibraryThing's Early Reviewers program. Thankfully. Quite frankly, this book is borderline terrible.
  
  The only thing positive I can offer is that it does contain some interesting, if trivial, facts that I didn't know. That's about it.
  
  Now for the negatives. First and foremost, the writing is truly dreadful. For example, in two separate chapters (one on the UCLA dynasty the other on "great performances") the authors use almost the exact same language. It's incredibly lazy writing (and editing), and it makes for a repetitive and boring read. Let me give one example. In the chapter on the UCLA dynasty, the authors write: “Alcindor, who later changed his name to Kareem Abdul-Jabbar, was the most heralded freshman to ever play at UCLA—maybe anywhere in the history of college basketball. In an era when freshmen couldn’t play for the varsity, Alcindor was clearly the most notable sports name on campus even before he played in his first basketball game.” Two chapters later (in the section on Alcindor in the chapter on great performances) the authors write: “Alcindor, who later changed his name to Kareem Abdul-Jabbar, was the most heralded freshman to ever play at UCLA—and maybe anywhere in the history of college basketball. In an era when freshmen couldn’t play for the varsity, Alcindor was clearly the most notable sports name on campus when he arrived in Westwood.” That’s right, we have the addition of the word “and” and a change from “even before he played his first basketball game” to “when he arrived in Westwood.” This type of thing happens time and time again. In the UCLA chapter and the separate section on Bill Walton, the reader is subject to the exact same quote from John Wooden and is told in exactly the same words that Walton “played with inflamed knees that needed constant medical attention.”
  
  In addition to the repetition, the authors have a penchant for inserting completely useless quotes; apparently, for the sole purpose of using a quote. The authors even resort to quoting college basketball guides. One example should suffice: “’It looked like a short, quick tournament for City College,’ the CCNY basketball guide said.” I still have no idea why recourse to the CCNY basketball guide for that quote is either necessary to make that point or somehow provides more authority or enhances the underlying fact (e.g., by using a particularly noteworthy or pithy turn of phrase).
  
  Finally, as far as the writing goes, the authors contradict themselves within pages and confuse basketball issues that authors of a book about basketball should understand. For contradiction, on page 56, the authors write: “It may sound laughable today, but Kurland was praised in an article by Life magazine for being ‘balanced and coordinated in spite of his height.”” I took this to mean that what was “laughable” was the generalization that tall players are generally uncoordinated, yet five pages later the authors write that Lew Alcindor was “unusually coordinated for a big man.” Laughable. But for different reasons. The authors also confuse goaltending with basket interference (an excusable mistake if made by a casual fan, but inexcusable in a book about basketball). Readers are told that the goaltending rule was “obviously directed at [Bob] Kurland,” who played in the 1940s, and other tall players. That’s correct. However, five pages earlier, the reader is told that “another rules change came in response to [Bill] Russell: players would not be allowed to touch the ball on its downward arc toward the basket. This became known as ‘goaltending.’” This is an accurate description of goaltending, but Russell played a decade after Kurland, and the goaltending rule was already in place (although the authors don’t give a date for adoption of the goaltending rule, but readers can infer that if the rule was directed at Kurland it must have followed shortly thereafter). What the authors must intend here is a reference to basket interference.
  
  I could go on and on with the copious examples of atrocious writing, but I’ll leave it at that. As for the other flaws, I’ll be brief. As others have observed, notwithstanding the subtitle, this book is not a history of the NCAA tournament in really any sense. There’s very little discussion of the origin of the tournament, its interplay with the NIT, how teams have been selected and seeded throughout its history, how sites are chosen, how and why the tournament has expanded, etc. The closest the authors come is the final ten pages of the book, much of which is in a text box on the NIT inserted into the chapter on the movement toward players leaving early (which has nothing to do with the NIT as far as I can tell). Instead, there are brief snippets about coaches, teams, and players (which often repeat information in other chapters). That’s fine, but it’s not what the subtitle indicates. As for structure, other than the fact that the book contains chapters and sections, there is none. Rather, the snippets are thrown together in what appears to be a completely random order.
  
  To put it in a sentence: I love college basketball, but I had to try very hard to make myself finish this book.
  
• 
  Rose

  I'm going to preface this review with a forewarning - "The Big Dance" isn't so much a comprehensive history of the NCAA Basketball tournament as it is a collection of defining sports moments in the history of the NCAA, presented in an intricate viewpoint of quotes and reports, like someone just taking a snippet of an article about a given set of games. If you're looking for a book that tells the inside story of the structure, founding, and history of the league in itself and the major players in front of and behind the scenes, this is not the book to pick up, and I'll admit that from the blurb the book gives, my expectations for this book were not met.
  
  What "The Big Dance" does entail is a series of stories, ranging from teams such as UCLA, Carolina, Duke, among other teams throughout the years, and the stories of the players contributing to those defining games. But I'll admit that as a fan of the games and March Madness especially, I was very underwhelmed by the presentation in this book. For one, it's quite randomized, a grab bag of sorts without easy transition. Each of the chapters jump from one event to the next with little cohesion, and probably could've benefited from further structuring from event to event. I probably would've even liked if there were headings that organized the events in decades rather than the general titles they were given, because it was difficult to tell what the subject matter would be about. It wasn't the kind of compilation I would turn to learn about the history of the game and the organization as a whole, and it seemed to lack the narrative passion and intrigue that could've made these stories more intimate and filled with just as much excitement as the games.
  
  I think the only reason I give this two stars is because it's more of a benefit of the doubt ranking - this probably would've made for a better special edition magazine compilation, combined with photos and interviews of those involved with the games, but since this is a book and it doesn't seem to have the directive to carry it, it wouldn't be something I'd recommend to sports fans who are looking for a detailed non-fiction account of the NCAA.
  
  Overall score: 2/5
  
  Note: I received this as an ARC from NetGalley, from the publisher Taylor Trade Publishing.
  
  
• 
  Anna

  I reviewed this in The Christian Science Monitor :
  http://isak.typepad.com/isak/2012/03/...
  
  "The Big Dance" two-steps around the big picture and satisfies itself with winning anecdotes. The chapters feel like they could’ve been placed in any order at all. More compilation than comprehensive -- and a circuitous, narrow, and literally repetitious compilation at that. Disappointing: the authors -- veteran sportswriters -- did get great interviews and have a contagious enthusiasm. But this did not add up to a good book.