Any casual fan that watches both NBA and college basketball could tell you that there’s a big difference between the gameplay at each level. The NBA is filled with the best athletes in the world that can all put on incredible individual displays, but the college game is all about team X’s and O’s and playing hard for 40 minutes. Even the strongest advocates of NBA basketball could agree that about half the teams in the league struggle to play hard every night.

When college coaches recruit players, NBA-type talents are obviously at the top of every team’s wish list. If your school can land 1 McDonald’s All-American player (of 24), it’s considered a good recruiting class. But since the NBA changed its age rule in 2006 to require players to either attend college, prep school, or play elsewhere for at least 1 year after high school, there has been an interesting theme developing. Is it a risk to go all-in to recruit an NBA-type talent that might just be using his college year(s) to refine his skills for the NBA? It might be more worthwhile to try to recruit guys that might be less talented but are guaranteed to stay for 3 or 4 years in college and are more committed to the team’s success.

This year’s NCAA Tournament has fueled the fire behind the recruiting debate. A look at the rosters of the Final Four teams shows that a team of veteran players who have played with each other for a long time is the key to success this year. The NBA-type talent is lacking in this year’s Final Four. That is just 1 of many themes that have developed over the course of 4 rounds of play. Let’s take a look at 3 of the top headlines from the Sweet 16 and Elite 8 games last weekend:

TOP TALENTS NOT LEADING TO SUCCESS - This aforementioned topic is the most interesting theme of the Final Four. Talent scouts and NBA fans are quick to point out that there are no lottery pick-type talents left on any of the remaining 4 teams in the tournament. Rather than dwell on that aspect, it’s interesting to study how these teams have found a way to succeed without All-American talent. Remember when Texas coach Rick Barnes was quoted earlier this month saying that he was just helping his players get ready for the NBA?

"We would love to win a national championship, but we're not obsessed with it because we're obsessed with these guys trying to live their NBA dream," said Barnes. "What's happened to Kevin Durant, LaMarcus Aldridge, T.J. Ford -- I'd give up a national title for all of our guys to be able to live their dream."

That’s exactly what has made teams like Butler, Michigan State, Duke, and West Virginia successful this year. Texas is a more talented team than all 4 of them, but the desire to win was simply lacking. Butler is a team of solid, veteran players who have played together for 3 or 4 years. They’re good, but they’re not NBA good. They know that they’re talented enough to win games, and they’ve bought into the program. The same goes for the other 3 teams. West Virginia’s Devin E’Banks is only a sophomore and might head to the NBA next year as a late first rounder. But that doesn’t mean he hasn’t bought into the program. The Mountaineers are filled with guys that have put their egos aside and transformed their games to fit with the WVU style. I don’t know if you can say the same for Kentucky’s John Wall or Georgia Tech’s Derrick Favors. These future top-5 picks have given it their all this season, but 2 years of a transformed E’Banks is better for team success than 1 year of a self-interested Favors. I could go on and on about this debate of recruiting, but it’s safe to end it by simply looking at the Final Four teams. No lottery picks, no one-and-dones, and a bunch of junior and senior star players who have improved dramatically over the years. That’s how you build winning teams at the college level.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

HOLD ONTO THE BALL - Everyone knows that turnovers are the biggest momentum killing, game-changing aspects of a basketball game. But most of the time, a super-talented scoring lineup can make up for a mass of turnovers by their ability to score at a high rate of points per possession, and create extra shots for themselves with offensive rebound opportunities. This year, however, not turning the ball over has been one of the major keys to success. The Final Four teams all have done a terrific job at holding onto the ball, maximizing possessions, and not turning it over to lead to opponent transition baskets. None of the teams remaining averaged more than 14 turnovers per game on the season. Duke and West Virginia were in the low 11’s per game and were top 20 in the nation at turnover margin. Butler was great as well. Michigan State was the worst at 13.8 turnovers per game, but that is still better than half the country. Butler was able to take down the more talented Syracuse team thanks to a +12 turnover margin in the Sweet 16, a game in which the Orange gave it away 18 times. Super-talented teams were unable to take down the in-control, high basketball IQ teams that still remain in the tournament. Taking care of the ball was a big key.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

CRASH THE BOARDS - Here’s another theme that developed during last weekend’s games. Teams that were able to gain extra possessions by grabbing offensive rebounds had tremendous success. Sometimes, high rebound rates can be indicative of poor shooting and therefore more opportunities for offensive boards. But with these four remaining teams, their extra offensive possessions were a matter of hustle and key plays, giving them second chance points to go along with high shooting percentages. During the season, Duke and West Virginia were 2 of the top 10 teams in all of Division 1 in offensive rebounding, with over 14 per game. Michigan State averaged 13.3 per game, good for top 50 in the country. Butler struggled mightily with offensive rebounding on the season, but they stepped up when it mattered most and grabbed a solid 12 offensive boards against Kansas State’s vaunted front line in the Elite 8 game. Duke pulled down an astounding 22 offensive rebounds against Baylor in the Elite 8, the clear X-factor of the game. Teams that were able to crash the boards and create second chances for themselves after misses were successful this year.

There are plenty of factors that one could look at when studying how the Final Four teams got to Indianapolis. I identified 3 major keys to success that helped these four schools get it done in 2010 and see themselves 2 wins away from a National Championship. We’ll see what happens this weekend in Indianapolis, and what major themes help crown our champion.