Madness by Committee

Bubble talk. The field. Bracketology. Cutting down nets. The Power Six. RPI. SOS. ACC. PAC10. Got all that? Just checking, because today is the day, people...

Today is Selection Sunday.

Quite possibly, the most intense day of the year for College Basketball fans. Today is the day that all those teams who didn't win their Conference Championship are holding their collective breath. Everyone is listening to (thankfully, not Doug Gottlieb) ESPN commentators talk about who's making it and who's not. I guess when it comes down to it, all the talk doesn't really matter, because the Committee has the last word.

That is sort of the cornerstone of our country. The Committee. Wherever you are, that "vote" of multiple people sitting around a table determines everything. I mean, really, even our government is run by Committee. Of course, it makes sense, because we value democracy. But I just find it interesting. We never trust the word of one person. It always has to be "validated" by the word of someone else. You can practically have a committee of complete morons decide something, and we still give it more weight than one really smart person deciding something important. That sort of bothers me.

Here's what I like about committees: multiple perspectives add richness to the view of a subject/issue.

Here's what I don't like: it places a low value on intelligence and wisdom, and a high value on either conformity or subjectivity.

Now, of course, not all committees do this. There are some people who know how to lead committees, teams, and groups effectively who can really free people up to be empowered individuals who work together. But most of the committees I've been on have been a collection of people who don't really want to be there (*most* being the key word... there have been notable exceptions), and who are willing to go along with whoever shouts the loudest or is the most outspoken. I've seen committees get together with individuals intending to make one decision who then are persuaded to conform because they are running out of time, or they don't have the confidence to stand up to a strong personality. And then whatever decision gets made is given validity because it was made by a group.

I'm not necessarily saying that committees are bad, or that individuals making decisions are better. But I am saying... let's be careful of making claims about "truth" and "fact" and "best" just because one person's opinion is validated by a couple of his friends. My personal opinion, I'd rather let Jay Bilas make the decisions about the field by himself. Why? He's smart. I'd even be happy with Hubert Davis or Digger Phelps. They're smart guys. They may not always agree with each other, but they're smart. And they try to be as unbiased as possible. Of course, they can't ever be completely unbiased. I've never seen, for instance, Hubert Davis predict that Duke would beat Carolina, or heard Jay Bilas predict that Carolina would be Duke. But they are smart guys. And they know what they're talking about.

Do I not trust the Committee? I don't think that's the issue. I can't help that we feel the need to have a Committee validate everyone's decisions. I can see the benefits of committees in some situations. (Like passing laws, for instance... that's sort of a lot of power for one person.) But I think in general, we as Americans need to be a little more aware of our distrust of single leaders or decision-makers. Yes, there are bad leaders who compound issues by being able to make decisions on their own. But there are also times when we need one person to just step up and make the decisions, and not filter everything through a committee or require a validation of opinion by committee in order to be considered valid.

Not necessarily in the case of Selection Sunday. But just some food for thought.