Why wouldn't the big crunch just create a black hole?

Assuming the so-called Big Crunch should occur you should remember also that not only all the existing matter of the present universe would be compressed but all existing energy as well. The closer and closer the universe drew to total collapse, the greater and greater would be the density/temperature of everything in it. At some point all mass would be forced into pure energy and that, along with already existing energy, would preclude a black hole.

Another point to consider is that when the Big Crunch progresses as far as possible, spacetime would for an instant no longer exist. Black holes exist only in spacetime.

Let's be clear...the Big Crunch is a hypothesis, not a theory. I know it's a quibbling point, but I get frustrated at the cavalier use of the term "theory" when used in scientific parlance.

Anyway, since the Universe began as a singularity, I see no reason why it wouldn't end that way in the Crunch if there is sufficient gravitational attraction to overcome expansion.

Nonetheless, I don't think there is and I believe the Universe will continue to expand until the final proton blinks out in about 10^40 years.

" ...final proton blinks out in about 10^40 years." ?? Should I sell all by stock now?

Some theories allow up to 10^169 years, or even longer. See the link below. This is longer that the estimated life-time of a galaxy-size black hole (10^98 years).

On the other hand, if the universe is closed, then it's life-time will be about 60 x 10^9 years, before the big crunch.

All evidence points to the fact that expansion of the universe is accelerating and no big crunch will occur.

If there was a force equal to that of the big bang, or the force of the current expansion of space, wouldnt it put us at a stand-still instead of sending us the other dirrection?

no, the universe expansion is accelerating ! there will not be a big crunch.

I think that the prevailing model suggest that the universe will keep on expanding forever.