Responses to Selection Sunday
by Chris Clement and Paymon Hashemi

Bracket Projection Results

TEAMS SELECTED: 63/65 (32/34 at-large)
PREDICTED WITHIN ONE LINE: 49/65
EXACT SEEDS PREDICTED: 27/65

At this time last year, I was not a member of the blogosphere, but I did predict 62 of 65 teams correctly. After last year’s committee focused on conference allocation, I still went with my better judgment rather than unconventional idiocy. I’ll take solace in picking Syracuse and Drexel over the two Big Ten strugglers, Purdue and Illinois.

****
Big Ten love?

When the committee says that it doesn’t look at last year’s results, it’s true when it comes to the Big Ten. If you recall, the Big Ten didn’t even make it out of the first weekend last year. It would be ignorant to suggest that a conference representative won’t make it out of the first weekend, but frankly, the Big Ten was not that good this season. Ohio State and Wisconsin were stellar and the rest were either mediocre of just plain bad.

Sure, Illinois had 11 conference wins, but six were against the bottom three teams (Minnesota, Northwestern, Penn St.). Purdue had 10 conference wins, half of which were against the same bottom three. They even lost a game against Minnesota. How many times did either team defeat Ohio State and Wisconsin? Squadoosh. How many RPI top 25 teams did either team defeat? Squadoosh.

As for Indiana, how on earth do they get a 7 seed? They were 5-8 against the RPI top 50, 5-10 on road and neutral courts, stunk up the court ever since they defeated Wisconsin at home. After that signature win, Indiana went 1-5 against teams not named Minnesota, Northwestern, and Penn St. That’s unacceptable, and the Hoosiers were better suited for the 10/11 lines rather than the 7 line.

****
Egregious Seeding Errors

To be honest, this is where the tournament committee really messed up with this bracket. Neither of us work for CBS, ESPN, or any of the networks who might feel they need to show some allegiance towards the selectors. Instead, we're calling them out, specifically the vague Gary Walters (who interviewed terribly on ESPN), for a variety of reasons. Point number of my complaints with this bracket: egregious seeds. We realize they have to protect certain regions and certain potential matchups, but some of the seedings had no excuse. We’ve already pointed out Indiana’s undeserved 7-seed. Let’s analyze four others that stood out as boneheaded mistakes mere seconds after I heard them.

1) Virginia as a 4-seed

This is a talented team, especially the backcourt duo, that clearly got boosted up 2 or 3 seeds. Sure, they took out Virginia Tech and won a share of the regular-season ACC title. But look at these losses down the stretch (@Miami, @Wake Forest, and in the ACC tournament NC State). Away from John Paul Jones, the 'Hoos were just 3-9. Did we stutter? There is no way this team is deserving of the four-seed. Unfortunately, this will become a recurring theme as we study some of the mistakes below.

2) Butler (AKA Miss November) as a 5-seed

Obviously, this seed was a reward for the Preseason NIT, which was almost 6 months ago. They shared the Horizon regular-season title with Wright State and were beaten again in the conference tournament finale by five to the Raiders. Despite being a fun team to watch and beloved by a lot of the media, Butler should be playing in an 8/9 game.

3) UNLV as a 7-seed

Yes, the Mountain West Conference has struggled in the Big Dance since its formation (5-21). However, the Runnin’ Rebels had an impressive RPI (10^th) and won 11 of their last 13 (with losses against San Diego St. and BYU mixed in-between). Look no further than the two teams listed above to see why the Rebels were shafted with the tough 7-seed.

4) Purdue as a 9-seed

What a surprise! Another Big Ten team getting far too much pub for “good losses”. Their RPI (45) is far from attractive as a 9-seed. If you want to talk about good wins out of conference (Virginia and who else?), then you better discuss the bad ones in-and-out (@Indiana State, @Minnesota, @Michigan). Outside of inconsistent-at-best Big Ten play, I really wonder why Purdue was rewarded over VCU, Creighton, Old Dominion, and some other conference champion teams as well as those already being mentioned as being left out.

****
An Overall Poor Job By The Committee

Again, I'm not here to pretend I could do better, but I know people (no, not Joe Lunardi) who actually watched the games and utilized more useful indicators in determining the best 34 at-large teams. With this blog as my podium, I’m also more than in the right to complain and ask the essential question “why?”

Why did Arkansas, according to the tournament committee, merit the final at-large birth [over the likes of Syracuse and Drexel] before the result to the Florida game occurred?

Why did Old Dominion deserve to be in and Drexel be out from the CAA? Why was the CAA given less respect than the A-10 and Horizon League?

Why was Syracuse snubbed from the field entirely? Why did Illinois and Purdue get in with less quality wins, similar futility against the RPI top 50, and weaker road and neutral court production?

Why were only 6 at-large births given to mid-majors after only 8 last year?

Why doesn’t the tournament committee watch the Sunday games in detail?

Was Akron, with that shot-clock discrepancy, completely forgotten with just cause for an at-large bid?

How much will the tournament miss guys like Al Thornton, Cartier Martin, Demetrius Nichols, Frank Elegar, and Mario Boggans (didn’t deserve to be, but an amazing talent)?

****
Clement’s Overall Thoughts

I’m not gonna lie, I’m heartbroken that Syracuse didn’t get in. Even more so with Drexel. With allegiances to my favorite team (the Orange) and my favorite conference (the CAA), I know I’m biased. However, I also believe that the Orange (3 wins against the top 25, 10 wins in conference, & .500 record on the road in conference) had enough quality wins to get in (Georgetown by 14, @Marquette handily, Villanova handily, @Providence on senior night), but I also realize our out-of-conference schedule was lacking as well as having losses to @St. John’s, @UCONN, and Drexel. We did lose games to Oklahoma St. and Wichita St., which turned out to be bad losses in retrospect despite both teams playing very well at the time. [Countless teams hung their seeds and selections on similar early victories and tough in-conference defeats.]

The real travesty (wow, I’m agreeing with Dick Vitale) had to be Drexel who had strong wins (wins @Syracuse, @Villanova, and @Creighton in a BracketBusters game) that outweighed the bad losses (@Penn, @Rider, @William & Mary). Yet, they were criticized for conference play – a double standard when thinking of Illinois, Purdue, Stanford, and especially Arkansas.

Staying with the talking heads, Jay Bilas made a major mistake during Bracketology tonight. Losses to VCU and ODU (even a sweep) are not bad losses for Drexel, since both teams are in and deserved to be in the tournament. An ever bigger error was from Doug Gottlieb, who is ten times better on radio than on TV. He claimed Air Force was snubbed. All they had to do was win one of their last four games and they folded.

In the end, I’ll ride my VCU Rams as long as they can go and enjoy the tournament as much as I can. Even with the obvious insight that ‘Cuse & Drexel would’ve struggled in tough first-round matchups, I still hate the fact I’ll spend the majority of this tournament rooting against people rather than rooting for them.

Message to Coach Boeheim: Please schedule tougher matchups out of conference earlier outside of New York.

Message to Bruiser Flint: You did everything you could and still got screwed. Screwed.