Notes on the bracket...

[ocoandasoc]

Looks like the Committee played a little give and take… USF gets to host… in UConn’s region… Kentucky gets a #2… in UConn’s region…

Does the Committee even LOOK at which teams have played before? South Carolina will play #16 Savannah State in their first game, and they beat them by 60 points already this season. The Committee could easily have switched a couple of 16th seeds around to avoid this rematch. Similarly, UK and Tenn St also played this year, and this would have been easy to avoid. If USF wins a couple of games they could wind up playing UConn for the fourth time this year. Chattanooga/TN is another repeat if seeds hold.

If you tell the NCAA you can’t host, you will get screwed. Higher seed Louisville will have to beat USF on USF’s home floor to advance from the second round.

So there are four teams with males coaches in the top 16, and the Committee puts three of them (Waltz, Mitchell, Auriemma) in the same region. Just like the old days!

Is the Committee biased toward the power conferences? Yes. Nearly every AP-ranked mid-major team was seeded lower – often FAR LOWER – than their relative position in the AP poll. GW a 6, GB an 8 playing Princeton a 9, UTC a 7, FGCU a 7, DePaul and Seton Hall are 9s, JMU and WKU are 12s, WSU a 13. The only exception is Dayton which got a 7 seed though they are not in the AP top 35.

Duke got a very favorable draw, and could be playing TN for the Regional final.

Maryland can’t be too happy about having to play either Princeton or Green Bay in the second round.

Oregon State would be relatively close to home if they get to Spokane, but they have to get by an under-seeded GW first.

SEC shows the overall strength of the conference with the seeding of seven teams. But they need to get a team or two into the Final Four where they have been conspicuous by their absence lately.

UConn and ND look like pretty safe bets in their regions. UConn knows how to beat UK and Louisville (and would probably rather play one of them instead of USF again!) and ND should match up okay with Stanford and Baylor or Iowa. The other two regions, however, are up for grabs.

First upset of the Tourney? Maybe Miami over Washington (How did they get a #6 seed?) or Arkansas over Northwestern.

Most interesting first-round matchups: Princeton/Green Bay, Minn/DePaul, Rutgers/Seton Hall, Cal/WSU, Dayton/ISU, Wash/Miami, Ark/Northwestern, Syracuse/Nebraska, FGCU/Ok St.

Potential good second-round games: Texas/Cal, Louisville/USF, Princeton or GB/Maryland, Duke/Miss St, GW/Ore St., ND/Minn, Stanford/Oklahoma, Syracuse/SC, UNC/OSU, FSU/FGCU.

 

[KnightBridgeAZ]

Looks like the Committee played a little give and take… USF gets to host… in UConn’s region… Kentucky gets a #2… in UConn’s region…

Does the Committee even LOOK at which teams have played before? South Carolina will play #16 Savannah State in their first game, and they beat them by 60 points already this season. The Committee could easily have switched a couple of 16th seeds around to avoid this rematch. Similarly, UK and Tenn St also played this year, and this would have been easy to avoid. If USF wins a couple of games they could wind up playing UConn for the fourth time this year. Chattanooga/TN is another repeat if seeds hold.

If you tell the NCAA you can’t host, you will get screwed. Higher seed Louisville will have to beat USF on USF’s home floor to advance from the second round.

So there are four teams with males coaches in the top 16, and the Committee puts three of them (Waltz, Mitchell, Auriemma) in the same region. Just like the old days!

Is the Committee biased toward the power conferences? Yes. Nearly every AP-ranked mid-major team was seeded lower – often FAR LOWER – than their relative position in the AP poll. GW a 6, GB an 8 playing Princeton a 9, UTC a 7, FGCU a 7, DePaul and Seton Hall are 9s, JMU and WKU are 12s, WSU a 13. The only exception is Dayton which got a 7 seed though they are not in the AP top 35.

First upset of the Tourney? Maybe Miami over Washington (How did they get a #6 seed?) or Arkansas over Northwestern.

A couple quick points

The rematches is the one thing you highlight that I agree completely, I don't get it.

If you tell the NCAA you can't host - because you are hosting men's games and they have Kentucky there thank you very much - you of course get screwed, by definition you will be playing on a lower seeded teams floor.

I think the issue about male coaches is idiotic.

While I do think that the the non-power teams were in some cases disrespected, it doesn't matter what the AP pollsters think of them. Power rankings, good wins, bad losses, schedule strength, etc. are much more important. Dayton was actually probably under-seeded, which you discount because they are not in the AP poll. OTH, many of the other seeds are very, very decent, particularly DePaul which was at risk of missing the tourney if they had not won the BE, and UTC and FGC are probably seeded higher than they could imagine previously. Princeton is a little low.

And yes, Washington seems high to me; Arkansas over NW is not something I want to see.