I'm doing this while I'm watching the selection show. I realize that CBS was thrown a curveball by the SEC tournament fiasco but who really thought we needed to see the replay of the 2007 championship game in its place? If ESPN didn't have so many damn networks, they would have salivated at having an extra two hours early on Selection Sunday to overanalyze the potential field of 65. I'm stunned that CBS didn't just stick Seth, Greg, and Clark on the tube to play another stupid "Jeopardy" type quiz show about which mid-major didn't deserve to make the tourney and which team should just because they were fortunate enough to play in the ACC (that's right, I'm talkin' to you Virginia Tech).
Actually Seth has been an overapologist lately for the mid-majors. I think he was so embarrassing a few years ago with his pro-"power" conference comments that someone politely said, "Seth, tone it down or hit the road"--unfortunately, now he gushes over the mid-majors. Anyone who saw his act a few years ago knows that isn't how he feels. Exhibit A of his recent behavior--he just gushed over the committee for putting in South Alabama, a bubble team after being upset by Middle Tennessee State in their conference tournament (Sun Belt for those of you scoring at home...and if you are, why are you reading an internet post??) and making them a 10 seed. Geez, Seth, there's got to be a middle ground.
Clark just praised the committee for giving Kent State a #9 seed. He just praised the committee for giving a decent conference champion a spot in the top 36 teams in the nation. Brutal. Thank God for the commercials...I need time to go jump start my brain.
Have you ever tried to write one of these things, fill in your bracket and balance your daughter as she falls over on you after she tried for the umpteenth time to sit up by herself. She can do it but she sees me typing and she wants to get a closer look.
Funny that halfway through, no mention of the lack of love for the Kelvin-less Sampsons who only notched a #8 seed. I bet Bobby Knight is cracking a smile like only he can. At least he A). never cheated and B). graduated a significant percentage of his students.
Kentucky and K-State as #11 seeds...wonder who was the last one in. And funny that the 3rd team in from the West Coast Conference, St. Mary's got a 10 seed in Kentucky's bracket. Ohhh, how the mighty have fallen. Think Wildcat fans don't have their Rick Pitino voodoo dolls in full force right now?
How does Pitt get all the way up to #4 based on their run in the Big East? It was a good run but they are not a consistent top 16 team.
Not sure I'm thrilled with Drake's #5 seed and their placement with two other conference champions plus the overrated Connecticut. I would not be shocked to see San Diego knock off UConn and I think this is a perfect mini-region to have a mid-major come out into the Sweet 16 (notice I'm not necessarily saying that's Drake either).
Baylor as a #11--I'm guessing they were in last behind K-State and Kentucky but man was it fun to watch them get fired up when they saw their name. I could swear Xavier got beat in their conference tournament and they still warrant a #3 seed? I guess I should be thankful since a lower seed could have meant Drake would need to beat them but a loss to St. Joe's who ALSO got a #11 seed should have dropped them to #4 (but since UConn lost early in their tournament to a weak W. Virginia team, the committee didn't leave themselves a lot of choices).
What's missing? Illinois State who was a lock according to Lunardi in Bracketology on ESPN.com but I told you last weekend that you can't lose the conference final by 30 in a mid-major conference
Already tired of the references to the "next George Mason", this one by the always inept Billy Packer. Instead of referencing the past, how about just talking about the matchups? But I will say that George Mason's run did go a long way to changing the major/mid-major paradigm with the William Packers and Seth Davises of the world. I just don't like it when a cliche is invented and worn out within one offseason of its invention.
I also noticed Notre Dame's reaction was a lot more boisterous than last year. Remember last year, I told you I noticed how quiet they were when they were announced compared to Winthrop's reaction and Winthrop already knew they were in. Sure enough #11 Winthrop beats Notre Dame in the first round. Didn't really notice anything this year other than Georgia's coach seemed pretty pissed about getting the #14 seed as the SEC conference champion. Hey coach--be thankful you're even in. Granted, you did the yeoman's effort in winning two games in one day (first time in any conference tournament that has ever happened) and then beating Arkansas the next day after the Razorbacks had upset Vandy and Tennessee in the tournament. But you would not be in the tournament without the conference title so you're at least behind the #11 seeds who were the last ones in. 14 might be low but tough. Enjoy your beating by the Xmen.
Quick run to change Izzy--I get back and the first comparison on ESPN Bracketology is Arizona/Arizona State. I'm already tired of it. Billy Packer asked Tom O'Connor, the committee chair, why the #1 rated RPI conference only sent so few teams and the #5 RPI conference sent in 7 teams. Tom's answers was perfect. He said the RPI was a "data point." Just one other piece of a large puzzle the committee puts together to determine a team's worthiness in the field of 65. Everyone who complains about not making it in, usually only has one data point to defend their argument and that's all they focus on. Then they go out in the first round of the NIT because they are too shell-shocked about missing the opportunity to go in the first round of the NCAA.
Expand the tournament? Seth Greenberg, the Va Tech coach, just lobbied for expanding the tournament so more kids could get a chance for that "one shining moment." Huh? The biggest problem with college sports right now is that in sports like football and hockey, too many people make the postseason. A bowl game in football doesn't mean anything any longer because 6-6 and 7- 5 teams are getting in. It's now become ok to be average. I remember when Iowa used to go 8-3 and consider themselves fortunate to be in the Freedom Bowl. It was a big deal to get a bowl bid. Now, all you have to do is hire Glen Mason and go 7-5 with a win over a NCAA Division II team (or is the Playoff division where BCS is a dirty word, and rightfully so). If a team really deserves to be in, they will have a strong, complete resume and there will be no question. The bubble teams shouldn't even be arguing this--if they get in, congrats, you got lucky. If you don't, you didn't do enough. Simply put--there is no bias on the committee--it's the hardest job in the country (other than Rick Majerus' fitness coach and Lindsay Lohan's sponsor) and they do the best with the myriad statistics they have at their disposal.
Let me end with this, Vitale just said that if we expanded to 128, we'd be sitting on Selection Sunday night arguing about 129, 130, etc. Trust me, I don't want to see a 16-16 Iowa team in a field of 128. If you ask me, I'd be for contracting the field to...
64 teams...I still don't get the play-in game.
Peace,
Reg
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
7 comments:
Talk about ranting! Reg, you've outdone yourself. Your over-analysis will once again be your downfall! Rock Chalk Jayhawk, Baby!
I can't believe Texas laid that egg today. They were with Kansas until the last couple minutes and then they collapsed. That's why Texas will not be in the Final Four (and should have been a 3 behind Wisconsin)
Artie, you ignorant slut.
I think your biggest problem with Seth is projection - he's just too much like you. You both love to find things to pick on and argue about minutia.
Overall, it looked like the committed did pretty well to me. Although they put a lot of major conference teams in with their at large bids, being from a major conference didn't necessarily guarantee you a high seed. Years back you'd never see a team like Kentucky make it in as an 11.
The only issue I had when watching the unveiling was that "holier than thou" Duke somehow got a 2 seed over Wisconsin who ACTUALLY WON their confernece tournament. With that said though, if Wisconsin is the best team the Big 10(11) has to offer this year, don't look for much a splash from the hometown conference.
Aren't you glad you asked me to participate on this?
Difference--I'm picking on little things to generate conversation and opinion--the blog was intital reaction that may or may not be affirmed upon rest and reflection.
Seth et al, pick on the little things because they can't understand why the mid-majors should even get in. Bobby Knight actually said tonight he thought they should get rid of the auto bid.
UPSETS, UPSETS, UPSETS
I wanted to share some thoughts on upsets. I follow the first couple rounds of the tourney and there seem to be three common threads to watch for with upsets:
1. When Mid-Majors get high seeds. Call this the "Gonzaga syndrome." Teams that are used to being 10's and lower seem to struggle when they're suddenly on top. I will be interesting to see how Butler and Drake handle their high seeds this year. I bet one of them loses in the first round...
2. New Big Conference Powerhouses. This is the same syndrome as above, but it happens to teams from big conferences that are suddenly higher than normal. Washington St. and Clemson look ripe for the picking here. Tennessee was rated high last year which was unusual and they didn't handle it well. It should be interesting to see how they do this year with another year under the belt.
3. Pick against the Big 10. The Big 10 tends to struggle, and I think this could be a particularly brutal year. I wouldn't be suprised if Wisconsin is the only Big 10 team to get out of the first round - and I'd bet anyone money that more than one Big 10 team won't survive through to the weekend...
Here are some first round upsets to watch for:
- Winthrop vs. Washington St. Winthrop is a small conference team with tourney experience - they could get lucky and win a game or two.
- Kentucky vs. Marquette. Here the major confernece team is the 11 seed vs. the mid-major team with a 6 seed. It will be interesting to see how that plays out.
- Villanova vs. Clemson. Was Clemson's run in the ACC tourney a fluke? I think it might be...
- W. Kentucky vs. Drake. Drake hasn't been here in awhile, can the justify their high seeding?
- San Diego vs. Uconn. Uconn has struggled and I think this game will at least be close.
- S. Alabama vs. Butler. Will Butler choke as a 3-seed and "Gonzaga it" in their first game?
The fun part is, no one knows....
Tony
Fortunately only the coaches, whose jobs are on the line, want a 128 team format. I think the NCAA knows better than to bite the hand that feeds it. How much pre- tournament excitement would be generated if they let 128 teams in? Bubble fever is a national disease (I had a really bad case this year).
Now for the meat: ASU & Va Tech DID get jobbed. How can head to head and a better conf. record not matter? And doesn't anyone on the committee EVER watch the ACC/Little 10 challenge? Wisconsin is the only team that could even hold 4th in the ACC or Pac 10 this year. The rest would be working hard (and failing) to stay out of the cellar in either league (Oregon St. not withstanding). Is my ACC showing? If so, let me also add that Duke is the most over-rated team in the country. What a gift they got being sent out West.
Gotta love The Drake.
Post a Comment