The Committee's Bracket Racket

I guess I can throw my two cents in about the brackets. I really don’t mind the inclusion of mid-majors, even if that means a 19-9 Florida State team doesn’t get in. I have no problem giving Air Force and Utah State bids. Those teams both finished second in the Mountain West and Western Athletic respectively. Those conferences aren’t great, but both of those leagues have proven over time that they can field competitive tournament teams. Having those leagues go two deep isn’t a bad thing. But when a conference like the Missouri Valley goes four deep, there is a problem. Night in and night out, the competition in these mid-majors just aren’t the same. When you take four teams from the MVC and four teams from the ACC, Big 12 and Pac-10, you are saying that MVC is as good as the other three conferences. That’s wrong. And yes, I know the committee supposedly doesn’t look at how many teams they take from each conference, just that they take the best 65 teams overall. But you know that’s a lie. Just ask Cincinnati (more on that in a minute).

If the committee really thinks that the MVC could go toe-to-toe with the big boys, then there is a major issue with how the field is being put together. The RPI is a nice tool. The Sagarin ratings are a nice tool. The poll rankings have been used forever. But when it comes down to it, overall record and conference strength need to overweigh every other factor. I can’t stand how overall record is almost meaningless now. I keep hearing Texas A&M, a team that won 21 games, shouldn’t be in the tournament because they had a weak schedule. But they won 21 games. Why should an A&M team that went 21-8 be kept out, while a team like Michigan, that went 19-10, be put in. Just because Michigan’s RPI is better? Texas A&M won more games. They played in a power conference. They won a tournament game. They played much better down the stretch. How can these ESPN stooges, namely resident Dookie Jay Bilas (Who I’ve met and happens to be a real nice dude), sit there and complain that Michigan’s RPI is better so they should be in. That’s a joke. When did it become the job of coaches and athletic directors to worry more about RPI than winning games. I know that the first thing I would ask a coach that I want to hire is “how are you going to win us enough games to get in the tournament every year.” Not “how are you going to inflate our RPI each season.” The RPI, in my opinion, is necessary to a point to help seed teams once they’ve been rewarded with a dancing ticket. It can even be used in case of tiebreakers to give at-large births. But when it becomes the end all, be all of NCAA invitations, then there will be no reason to even care about the regular season. Not to mention that Missouri State, a MVC team with the 21st RPI didn’t get in while several other MVC members with higher RPI’s did get in. So even within the tournament committee, there is no consistency.

So, in short, I have no problem with most of the teams admitted (and the ones I do have issues with don’t seem to be controversial in the mainstream). I have more of an issue with the strange seeding that the tournament committee pulled out of their hat this year. So here are my gripes with the committee pairings, but also a look ahead to some of the regions and games in the upcoming weeks.

By the way, here is a schedule of what is going to put on the site this week, if you are curious:Today: Bracket review, complaints, issues, quick preview of NCAA’s
Tomorrow or Wednesday: Regular and conference season in review, player awards
Thursday: Quick predictions of the entire bracket and longer predictions of Day 1 action
Friday: Predictions for Day 2
Saturday: Predictions for Round 2, Day 1
Sunday: Predictions for Round 2, Day 2

Hopefully I’ll stick to this. But St. Patrick’s Day is Friday and I can’t make any guarantees.

BRACKET REVIEW

Even though I didn’t do great in predicting the brackets, I got 31 out of the 34 at-large teams correctly. “St. Joe’s” Lunardi only got 30. By the way, I’ve noticed that Lunardi claims he has correctly predicted 33 of 34 teams the past three years. That’s an outright lie. He only got 31 last year and 32 the year before. Just another example of ESPN making things up to look more credible.

Teams that got in that shouldn’t have: Seton Hall, Bradley, Northern Iowa, Alabama
In every big game that Seton Hall played, they got stomped. They got killed by Duke, UConn and Villanova. Not just beat, but beat down. And they lost their first round tournament game to Rutgers, which is a team with one decent player with a name that Fred Smoot would find funny. Bradley and Northern Iowa are the two MVC teams I have serious issues with. SIU gets in because of the conference tournament. WSU had a good season and won the conference title. Missouri State should have taken the place of one of either BU or NIU. NIU started hot and then tanked in the second half of the season. BU was strictly mediocre until the end of February when they got hot and advanced to the MVC tournament final. Still, Bradley finished in sixth place in the MVC. Just for your information, the sixth place team in the ACC, Big 12 and Pac-10 are all making NIT plans (and rightly so, but BU should be joining them). Here is their out of conference schedule: at Depaul (loss), Chicago St., at Loyola-Chicago (loss), Bowling Green, at Butler (loss), Western Kentucky, Delaware St., Southern Miss and Tennessee Tech. They lost seven games in conference, including bad losses at Drake and at Indiana State, and lost 10 games overall. So a MVC team, that finished sixth, won a couple of very close tournament games and had an overall record of 20-10 got into the field. I don’t get it. What’s worse is no one's making a stink about this team getting in when they shouldn’t have even been in the discussion. Alabama had an overall record of 17-12. I can’t remember the last time an at-large team had that bad of a record. Even if the Tide were 10-6 in conference play, no team with 12 losses should be given an at-large bid.

Teams that got jobbed: Cincinnati, Florida State, Hofstra
The committee, who always says they don’t take into account total conference bids, is pulling the wool over your eyes. The only reason that Cincinnati didn’t make it is because the Big East already had eight teams. Why Seton Hall over Cincy…I don’t know. FSU becomes only the second team in the history of the ACC to finish 9-7 and not get a bid. Hofstra beat George Mason twice in the final two weeks and finished with a nearly identical record. Do head-to-head matchups count anymore?

The committee got it right: Pittsburgh, Wichita State, George Washington, Utah State
I saw that many analysts had Pitt as high as three seed, which would have been a disgrace. A five seed was just right. Wichita State and GW also got proper placement. If the MVC was so good this year, than WSU, the team that won the regular season, should be a seven seed. They can't be lower than that or you make the argument against the MVC. GW, despite having the best record, played a schedule that was in the bottom 5 percentile in toughness. Plus, they're in the middle of investigating academic fraud in Foggy Bottom, so GW should be penalized for that. And they lost in the first round of their lousy conference's tournament. Look at it this way. Last year, GW won both their tournament and regular season crown and got a 12 seed. This year, they only win the regular season title in a weaker A-10, and they get an 8 seed. If anything, the committee was nice. I didn't think that Utah State would get in, but I'm glad they did. They deserve it. They are consistantly one of the top mid-majors in the county, but because they play on the other side of the Mississippi, no one bothers to watch any of their games. They finished second in the tough and unpredictable WAC, and beat Nevada in Reno.

Teams seeded too high: Tennessee, UCLA, Indiana, Nevada, Montana
I don’t need to go into any detail about Tennessee getting a gift number two seed from the committee. That has been debated enough. The Vols won neither the regular season or conference championship in the SEC, but are seeded ahead of the two teams that did (LSU and Florida). UCLA is a good team, but are probably one seed too high. Indiana should be an eight seed at best, most likely a nine. Nevada, a real good team that no one knows about, has the prototypical seven seed resume. And as much as I love Montana (mostly because I picked them to win the Big Sky and they did), they should either be a 14 or 15 seed. There is no way their resume calls for a 12 seed. They are clearly not at the same level as an A&M or Kent State.

Teams seeded too low: Gonzaga, Illinois, Xavier
It’s about time the committee stopped screwing Gonzaga. They deserve a two seed. They’ve done everything possible in terms of scheduling, then winning big games to earn themselves a number two seed. Illinois probably should have been a three instead of a four. Xavier, despite the A-10 being down, should be an 11 or 12 seed, not a 14. Again, you can’t tell me that Montana is a better team than Xavier. Both finished second in their conference and had to win their tournament. The Big Sky isn’t better than the A-10.

Toughest region: Washington D.C.
The committee did UConn no favors. UConn, if the chalk holds, will face Kentucky and either Illinois or Washington in the second round. Then they get potential matchups against UNC or Michigan State in the Elite 8. Tennessee is also in the region (as overseeded as they are) along with two potential trouble makers, UAB and Wichita State. Even Utah State could cause problems for some higher teams in D.C.

Easiest region: Oakland
The region may not be easy for Memphis per se, but it is so wide open because their isn’t a dominant team. The best team may be fourth seed Kansas or seventh seed Marquette. Memphis is a weak number one. Again, UCLA is a good team, but they haven’t looked great against top competition from other conferences (like their big loss at home to West Virginia). Gonzaga, who should be the number two seed here, has had problems in recent years just getting out of the first weekend. Pittsburgh is weak at the guard position, and a second round choke artist. Indiana is weak overall, easily the worst sixth seed in the tournament. Even the lower seeds like Bucknell, Alabama and Bradley are a sorry lot of possible Cinderella contenders. This bracket is weak, but open for whoever gets hot.

Best first round games: Kentucky vs. UAB, Marquette vs. Alabama, California vs. NC State
If you like a college game that is going to be 20 RPM’s faster than normal, Kentucky vs. UAB is your game. Both teams run and press with complete disregard for turnovers or opposing fast break opportunities. Plus, it will be a rematch of the great second round upset pulled by UAB over the Wildcats just two years ago. This time, the two teams are more evenly matched. If Marquette is worse than I think and Alabama is as good as everyone else thinks, this game will have at least one overtime. Call it a “Predictor reach pick”. California against NC State should be an interesting matchup between two power conference teams with two completely contrasting styles.

The “Dreaded Five/Twelve Game”: Syracuse vs. Texas A&M or Pittsburgh vs. Kent State
I’m not necessarily predicting upsets here (more on that Thursday or Friday), but one or two five seeds always go down in round one. I’m not sold on the other two 12’s (Montana and Utah State). Kent St. has made a run before, all the way to the Elite 8 in 2002. A&M is the requisite 12 seed from a power conference (a la Missouri in 2002) that could get hot and has the talent to pull more than one upset.

The “Gus Johnson Site”: Dayton, OH
This category is named for CBS play-by-play announcer Gus Johnson (who is excellent, by the way) who always seems to call the tournament’s big first and second round upsets. And we aren’t talking about a power conference 10 beating a 7. We’re talking real upsets here. The question I pose here is, if you had a few hundred dollars and a free weekend to blow, which first/second round site would you want to go to if you wanted to see big upsets? This year, the city that hosts the two pods that have the best chances for a major potential upset is Dayton. The UNC pod and the Ohio State pod are sent to University Arena. OSU and UNC join Michigan State and Georgetown as four teams that could potentially be in for an ambush in D-town. OSU takes on Davidson, a team that regularly challenges the big boys in North Carolina during the season. Davidson is one of those small conference teams that rely on shooting a lot of threes. They are basically the same team as the one that gave Maryland a scare at Comcast Center during the NIT last year. Now I like OSU, but they have some awful shooting nights from time to time. If Davidson gets hot, this game could go their way. UNC is a very young team with little NCAA tournament experience. Murray State, as their team nickname Racers implies, is a very quick team. They could potentially run with UNC. Like OSU, if the Heels shoot poorly from outside, the Racers could give them some serious problems. Someone other than Tyler Hansbrough has to step up. Michigan State is a Jekyll and Hyde team that has lost to Hawaii and some other poor squads this season. At times, Paul Smith looks great. Other times, you wonder what all the fuss is about. Even without ball-punching Tony Skinn, George Mason is going to challenge MSU in this game. Jai Lewis should be able to neutralize Smith, if not play even better than him. If Hyde shows up, MSU is gone. Northern Iowa over Georgetown wouldn’t be a huge upset, but an upset nonetheless. The Hoyas have limped into the NCAA’s. They peaked three weeks ago. NIU is a disciplined, “Hoosiers”-like team that isn’t going to be fooled by the Princeton offense. They are sound defensively and methodical on offense. And, unlike most mid-majors, they have depth. The Hoyas could be primed for an upset looking ahead to OSU. Now I’m not predicting it yet, but I think all four high seeds could be in for dogfights. I think at least one, most likely two of the higher seeds will fall before the weekend is over in Ohio. There should be a bracket busting game coming out of this site. Bye the way, wondering who CBS will have calling the action at the Dayton site? Gus Johnson.

Final Four predictions: Coming Thursday, but let’s just say, Duke isn’t one of them. Nor is another number one seed. It just may surprise you who I have leaving this tournament rather early. Think Big East.