I'm a Kansas homer. I know it. I have to get this out of my system. Bear with me.
There is no legitimate defense of giving Texas a one seed over Kansas. Follow me through the committee's logic.
We'll start with the premise that after tournament craziness, only four teams were competing for the last two one seeds--OU, Texas, Kansas, Pitt. This seems clear.
Just as clearly, the committee decided that Pitt's numbers weren't good enough, despite their conference and tournament play, to get a one seed. So they excluded them right away. Whether or not this is fair is not my point here; I agree with that decision, but it's subjective. Either way, it's obviously what was decided.
So it's down to two of the three Big 12 teams, right? The numbers are so close as to be irrelevant--they are all between 3 and 6 in SOS and they are 3,4,5 in RPI. Not worth considering as distinguishing factors.
Head to head is screwy--Kansas beat Texas, Texas beat OU, OU beat Kansas. Not much help there. What's next?
Conference tournament--right. OU wins the tournament, gets a one. I have absolutely no problem with this. It's correct.
So it's KU v. Texas. But KU beat Texas. And KU went one round further in the conference tournament. And KU won the conference tournament outright.
So we'll give it to Texas!
Am I missing something?
Oh, but that's not the only level of screwing KU received. Bear with me: Kansas clearly has to be considered the strongest 2 seed, right? This can't be debatable. And so given that, you'd think they put them with a weaker one seed, and closer to home. Nope. Ship 'em out West! Put 'em with Arizona! This is logical.
AND all commentators are in agreement that the West is an absolutely preposterous bracket. Let's break down the seeds and see what we see:
One seeds: UK, Arizona, Texas, OU
It's a bit of a tossup between Kentucky and Arizona (UK gets my vote, but it's close) for the strongest of these four teams. Arizona is right there. They are in the West.
Two seeds: Kansas, Wake, Pitt, Florida
Florida? Are you freaking kidding me? They lost their last three games! Pitt had a good year, but based on the numbers this one is a laugher. KU is the best two seed. They are in the West.
Three seeds: Duke, Marquette, Xavier, Syracuse
Closer here, but I think we can agree that Marquette and Xavier are a bit behind the other two. Close between Duke and Syracuse, but if you watched the ACC tournament you know that Duke is darned good. 'Cuse is good, but they have less experience and worse coaching and they play in the Big East. Best three seed IMO? Duke. They are in the West.
Four seeds: Illinois, Louisville, Stanford, Dayton
Illinois crushes all comers in the Big Ten tournament, gets a four seed. What? What? Lousville collapsed down the stretch, Stanford is massively overrated in a weaker conference, Dayton is a team you gotta cheer for but they won the A-10. Come on. Illinois blows these guys away. They're in the West.
The West is an absolute bloodbath.
Biggest atrocities in the top four seeds: Kansas underseeding, Florida overseeding, and placement. Can anyone explain the thinking behind putting Duke and Illinois in the WEST bracket, putting Stanford in the SOUTH? Just to name a few.
OK. I'll try and keep complaining to a dull roar. Later today: A review of the East bracket.
11:43:43 AM 
|
