Let the Courtship Commence!
The start to the tournament is less than 40 hours away. Forgive me if I refuse to act as if the tournament begins with the “play-in game” on Tuesday night. The tournament does not start with the tip-off of that travesty. Rather, the bracket is finally set when that monstrosity ends and one of those teams becomes the other #16 seed. Nobody even counts the play-in game in the brackets of their office pool, and if you don’t matter in the brackets, you’re not part of the tournament. It’s a joke. How the NCAA can justify cheating some poor team out of the true March Madness experience that they earned is beyond me. They need to get rid of the play-in game right now. It’s a friggin joke.
Speaking of jokes, how gad awful is the SEC? The SEC is now officially worse at basketball this season than any BCS conference has ever been at football. Only 3 teams got into the field of 65 from the SEC, and it would have been just 2 if the league wasn’t so crappy that Mississippi State was able to win the conference tournament. Then the NIT began tonight with more embarrassment for the SEC. South Carolina--perhaps the SEC’s main bubble team heading into the conference tournament—hosted over-hyped media darling Davidson in the first round of the NIT. At least they were supposed to host Davidson, and the game was played in the Gamecocks’ home gym, but it sounded a whole lot more like a Davidson home game. Making matters worse, Davidson—a middling team that would have received no attention this year were it not for Stephon Curry, his hot mom, and the run they made in last year’s tournament—led South Carolina throughout and pulled away in the end for an easy win. The SEC is a joke when it comes to basketball right now and so are SEC basketball fan bases. I seriously think Memphis would have gone undefeated in the SEC this season, and I don’t think a single SEC team would have finished in the top 10 of the Big East. Pathetic. SEC teams schedule nobody in non-conference play and that used to be okay because the league had enough credit that the teams that played well in the conference season would make the NCAA Tournament. Even last year when the SEC was weaker than it had been in more than a decade, the league still got its usual number of teams into the field of 65. But this season the play in the league was so bad that only 2 teams were even in the argument for an at-large bid on Selection Sunday. And when your regular season conference champ is an 8 seed and your conference tournament champ is a 13 seed, and the only other team you get in is an 8 seed, then you’re pretty much not a major conference anymore.
Now, back to the tournament. I realize that this has been a crazy year in which no teams have really distinguished themselves as being elite and it seems like anybody could lose at any time. Everybody is saying that the tournament is going to be as wacky as the regular season and the conference tournaments were. They may be right; I really don’t have any idea what’s going to happen either. I agree that things could get crazy, and maybe we’re going to have one of those years were the higher seeds fall fast and hard and throughout the tourney. Maybe we’re about to start a tournament that will remind us of why this thing is called March Madness in the first place (or at least CBS can call it March Madness; it’s illegal for anyone else to utter those two words in succession unless it’s done in reference to CBS’ exclusive coverage of the event). People are saying that this is as wide open as things have ever been in college basketball and that we might see more stunners than ever this tournament. They might just be right. But you know what? People say the same exact thing every season. And the fact is, March Madness hasn’t been all that mad for a while. In fact, the last 2 NCAA Tournaments have been decidedly sane. I have been of the opinion that the lessening of the madness was more than just a 1 or 2 year occurrence and would end up being a trend that would continue in the years to come. And as wild and unpredictable as this year has been, I still think this year’s tournament will be a lot more like the previous 2 tournaments than the more upside down tournaments of the past.
When George Mason went to the Final Four in 2006 there were some who thought it would signal a new day of college basketball, when the “little guys” would not only compete with each other for the chance to play spoiler early in the tournament, but would be able to match-up against the top teams in the country and would have almost as much of a chance at making a Final Four or even winning a National Title as any team from a major conference. Looking back, I believe we will come to see the 2006 tournament instead as the last truly “mad” March. That year the 1st round featured a stunning 8 victories by double digit seeds (2 #10’s; 2 #11’s; 2 #12’s; a #13, and a #14). A #11 seed and a #13 seed made the Sweet Sixteen, as did #7 Wichita State. #11 George Mason reached the Elite Eight and then did the unthinkable, upsetting #1 Connecticut in the Regional Final to reach the Final Four. Finally they lost in the semifinals but they were the 1st double digit seed to make the Final Four since LSU made it as a #11 in 1986, and just the 2nd ever. For the 1st time since 1980 and just the 2nd time in history there were no #1 seeds in the Final Four (The Final Four was made up of a #2, a #3, a #4, and a #11). Only 2 of the 4 Final Four teams were among the top 12 seeds in the tournament. This year came on the heels of a fairly “mad” 2005 tournament and a lot of people were saying that the playing field had been leveled to the point that this was now going to be the norm. Many said the gap between the bigs, the mids, and the littles had been shortened to the point that conference affiliation wasn’t really an issue anymore because there was not much reason to believe that a team in the middle of the pack in the Missouri Valley was any less capable than a team in a similar position in the ACC. This was the heyday of the mid-major. Parity had arrived and was here to stay.
Parity is a part of college basketball just as it is a part of every major sport in today’s world. But instead of the madness of ’05 and ’06 leading to the gap being shortened even more, things have swung way back into place hard. In 2007, no team seeded #13 or higher won a game in the tournament for just the 4th time since the field was expanded to 64 teams in 1985. Just 2 double digit seeds won in the opening round (both #11 seeds) and no double digit seed made the Sweet 16. 10 of the top 12 seeds made the Sweet 16; 7 of the top 8 seeds made the Elite Eight (the other team was a #3 seed); and for the 1st time since 1993 and just the 2nd time ever, no team seeded #3 or higher made the Final Four. Amazingly, 2007 was close to the polar opposite of 2006. It was the year of chalk. The CBS crew had a hard time dealing with the lack of madness. Although it was an excellent tournament, many people around the country whined about the lack of upsets. Last year the early tournament upsets came back. There were 6 double digit seed winners in the first round (a #10; a #11; 2 #12’s; and 2 #13’s); 2 teams seeded #13 or higher won a game in the first round; and there were 3 double digit seeds in the Sweet 16. Davidson made the Elite Eight as a #10 seed. Still, 10 of the top 12 seeds made the Sweet 16 for the 2nd year in a row, and Davidson was the only team seeded higher than #3 to make the Elite Eight. And one of the more well known March Madness facts became obsolete, as all 4 #1 seeds reached the Final Four for the 1st time in tournament history.
You could make the case that the 2007 and 2008 tournaments were just evening things out after the 2005 and 2006 tournaments, and that now it’s time for another “mad” March. You could argue that in the previous 2 seasons there was a large group of elite teams that were clearly better than the rest of basketball, and that this year the top teams are not strong by comparison. I think there’s some truth to that but I also think that the teams that would be spoilers or upsetters are not strong this year either. It’s not so much that I think the top 12 or so teams are all that special, it’s more that I’m not impressed by the next 40 teams.
In the past few years I’ve figured out which teams I really liked at some point during the year and stuck with those teams come tournament time. With the exception of Tennessee queefing in the regional semifinals last season, this strategy has served me well. This year no team totally convinced me but when all was said and done I realized that nothing had really happened to change my mind from what I thought at the beginning of the year (again with the exception of Tennessee not being very good; and also UCLA falling off more than I expected). I still think the top 12 or so teams are on a different level than the rest and I still think the Big East teams, Carolina, Oklahoma, and Memphis are the best teams out there. So my strategy in picking this year’s bracket leaned towards the upsets coming early rather than late. Since I just didn’t have a good feel for over half of the teams in the tournament this year, I tried to use historical trends to help my judgment. To begin with, there’s really no reason to pick a #1 seed to lose prior to the regional semi’s. If you have a #1 seed going out in the Sweet 16 and they go out in the 2nd round, you’re still going to benefit from them going out even though you didn’t pick it exactly right. On the other hand, if you have a #1 seed going out that early and you are wrong it can come back to hurt badly. Essentially it’s just not worth the risk. The same thing applies to #2 seeds in the first round. 92 of the 96 #2 seeds have made the 2nd round of the tournament since the field expanded to 64 teams in 1985. Even if you really think a #2 seed is in grave danger of going down to a #15, it’s just not worth the risk. And if they end up going out in the 1st round and you have them going out in the 2nd round you will still benefit. Although the chances of a #3 seed losing in the 1st round are much better, I still think the rule applies here as well. 15 #3 seeds have lost in the opening round (as opposed to 4 #2 seeds) but only 2 in the last 9 years. We know that the chances are good that a team seeded #13 or worse will win a 1st round game. At least 1 such team has made the 2nd round in 20 of the 24 years since the field expanded to 64 in 1985. It’s been a little less frequent recently but it’s still happened in 7 of the last 10 tournaments. In fact, 2 teams seeded #13 or higher have won an opening round game in 3 of the last 4 years, so it makes sense to try and find at least 1 #13 seed who could pull off an upset. However, there’s no reason to pick a #13 or higher seed to reach the Sweet 16 because it almost never happens. You know that it’s also very likely a few teams seeded #10-#12 are going to win so you have to look for a few of those. However, even in the “maddest” of Marches, only 2 or 3 double digit seeds usually make it past the 2nd round, so you don’t want to go crazy picking teams to pull off consecutive upsets. Another thing I looked at was the fact that #3 seeds have been as likely or more likely to make the Sweet 16 as #2 seeds. Other things I paid attention to were possible location advantages and also to teams from major conferences going up against better seeded teams from smaller conferences. One thing that people often do is look for the teams that come into the tournament on a roll and stay away from teams who stumble into the tournament. In my experience, this strategy does not work as well as one would expect. It seems like there is always at least 1 team who comes into the tournament as one of the hottest teams in the country and is a popular pick to make a deep run and then goes out early. Contrary wise, it seems like there is always at least 1 team that limps into the tournament and has people saying they don’t belong and then ends up winning a game or 2. With these things in mind, here are my predictions.
Midwest
First Round
#1 Louisville over #16 Morehead State
#2 Michigan State over #15 Robert Morris
#3 Kansas over #14 North Dakota State
#13 Cleveland State over #4 Wake Forrest
#12 Arizona over #5 Utah
#6 West Virginia over #11 Dayton
#10 USC over #7 Boston College
#8 Ohio State over #9 Sienna
Second Round
#1 Louisville over #8 Ohio State
#2 Michigan State over #10 USC
#6 West Virginia over #3 Kansas
#12 Arizona over #13 Cleveland State
Regional Semifinals
#1 Louisville over #12 Arizona
#2 Michigan State over #6 West Virginia
Regional Final
#1 Louisville over #2 Michigan State
For the record, I had Alabama State beating Morehead State in the play-in game. There is so much that is right about the tournament that I hate to complain but I continue to have concerns over the committee’s recent attempts to keep teams close to home. It’s not the keeping teams close to home aspect that I have a problem with, it’s the lack of consistency with which teams are given favorable locations. One of the bigger examples of this in this bracket is in the Midwest where the #8 vs. #9 game between Ohio State and Sienna takes place in Dayton, Ohio. Now the difference between an #8 and a #9 seed is essentially nil. In reality, there is no higher seed in the #8 vs. #9 games, and yet here we have a case where it seems certain that the #8 seed is going to get a bit of a crowd advantage. The entire state of Ohio is Buckeye country and at 9:40 on Friday night that place is going to be packed with Ohio State people. Not only do I think things like this have the potential to make the tournament less “tournament” like, I also have a problem with the idea that a #8 seed just randomly gets this advantage because the committee was able to set it up that way. As we all know, one of the main things that makes the tournament a true test of a team is that that the element of home court advantage is taken away. In this case, however, it would appear that Sienna will be playing at a least somewhat of a disadvantage. I have a little bit of an easier time dealing with a #1 or #2 seed staying close to home because that rewards them for a great regular season and anything to add importance to the regular season is a good thing in my opinion. But this doesn’t apply in the case of an #8 seed. Anyway, I probably would have gone with Siena if this game was not in the heart of Buckeye country. Moving on, this was the side of the bracket where I went with the most upsets. The Arizona-Utah game stood out because it was a team from a BCS conference going up against a higher seeded team from a non-BCS conference. Arizona has been the team that people have pointed to the most as a team that should not have gotten into the tournament. I don’t think that they are undeserving, I was just surprised when they made it because I didn’t think they were going to get in. They’ve lost a lot of games but they’re talented and they’re playing with a lot to prove against a team that is not a scary matchup for them. In fact, Arizona is a slight favorite over the Utes. And whenever everybody picks against a team, I start to think it might be best to go in the opposite direction. I decided to go with Cleveland State as my 1 #13 seed to win in the 1st round. I’ve been unimpressed with Wake Forrest in the last month plus and I saw Cleveland State beat Butler at Heinkle Field House in the Horizon League Championship Game. Wake is a 7.5 point favorite in the game but that’s really not all that bad. Plus, if I’m wrong, I really don’t expect Wake to get any farther than the Sweet 16. I thought Arizona was a good double digit seed to pick to get into the Sweet 16 because they fit the mold of the higher seeded team from a power conference that sometimes make it to the 2nd weekend. And I wasn’t going to pick Cleveland State to win 2 games so I had to go with Arizona. USC is coming off a run to the Pac-10 Tournament Title and I’m not a big believer in BC. I truly think Kansas could be in trouble against North Dakota State but it’s just not worth it to pick a #3 to lose in the 1st round. Kansas is inexperienced, overachieved this year, and coming off a loss to Baylor in their 1st game in the Big XII tournament. And this is another case of the location very likely having an effect on the game, and this one makes even less sense than the Ohio State-Siena game. North Dakota should get a big benefit from playing in Minnesota and they are a capable team. I don’t have a lot of confidence in Michigan State but I don’t have any reason to pick them to be upset by just anybody and I there’s nobody on their side of the region that I think should be favored over them. So I ended up with Louisville and Michigan State in the regional final and there’s nothing not to like about Louisville.
West
First Round
#1 Connecticut over #16 Chattanooga
#2 Memphis over #15 Cal State Northridge
#3 Missouri over #14 Cornell
#4 Washington over #13 Mississippi State
#5 Purdue over #12 Northern Iowa
#6 Marquette over #11 Utah State
#7 Cal over #10 Maryland
#8 BYU over #9 Texas A&M
Second Round
#1 Connecticut over #8 BYU
#2 Memphis over #7 Cal
#3 Missouri over #6 Marquette
#5 Purdue over #4 Washington
Regional Semifinals
#1 Connecticut over #5 Purdue
#2 Memphis over #3 Missouri
Regional Finals
#1 Connecticut over #2 Memphis
This bracket included another puzzling location issue. Washington is playing in Portland and this kept me from taking Mississippi State to upset them as a #13 seed in the first round. But this makes some sense because Washington is a #4 seed. However, #6 Marquette has to go to Boise to play #11 Utah State. I don’t get it. That’s a very dangerous game, as Utah State is good and they’ll have the a location advantage, plus Marquette has been much less of a team (naturally) since the loss of Dominic James. However, I just have a feeling that Marquette will win a game in the tournament. That’s all I can say about that one. The only team I actively pull for other than the Dawgs is Memphis and Cal scares me because they are the best 3-point shooting team in the land. Also, I don’t care what anyone says, there’s a much better chance of losing early as a #2 than there is as a #1, and the numbers back that up. However, I think Memphis will end up making the Elite Eight without much trouble. I will admit that despite having watched Missouri play 5 or 6 times this year I still don’t know much about them, but I think Memphis will handle them. The important issue with Purdue is whether or not they are healthy. When Robbie Hummel is at full strength they are great and I like them beat Washington. Everybody is down on UConn and I know they aren’t the same team that they were with Jerome Dyson but they’re still better than almost anybody out there. I believe the Connecticut-Memphis matchup that everyone is speculating over will take place. At this time last week I probably would have gone with Memphis to beat Connecticut but as the week went on something strange happened. Suddenly, everybody started to jump on the Memphis bandwagon. There are still detractors and they didn’t get the #1 seed, but they have gotten a lot of praise in the last few days. This may be idiotic but I just get swayed sometimes when everybody starts to go one way or another. Last year I picked Memphis to win the title and they nearly did but this year I think it’s a risk to take them to make the Final Four because they aren’t a #1 seed, and as great as they have been over the last few months, they aren’t the superstar team that they were last season. So in the end I decided to go with UConn to beat Memphis in the regional final.
East
First Round
#1 Pittsburgh over #16 East Tennessee State
#2 Duke over #15 Binghamton
#3 Villanova over #14 American
#4 Xavier over #13 Portland State
#5 Florida State over #12 Wisconsin
#11 VCU over #6 UCLA
#7 Texas over #10 Minnesota
#9 Tennessee over #8 Oklahoma State
Second Round
#1 Pittsburgh over #9 Tennessee
#2 Duke over #7 Texas
#3 Villanova over #11 VCU
#4 Xavier over #5 Florida State
Regional Semifinals
#1 Pittsburgh over #4 Xavier
#3 Villanova over #2 Duke
Regional Final
#1 Pittsburgh over #3 Villanova
Oklahoma is the “hot” team that I think will lose this year and Tennessee is actually a 2 point favorite. In another strange location issue, Xavier has to go to Boise to play Portland State, but I think Xavier is good enough to overcome the disadvantage. I feel like FSU has overachieved and they’re new at this tourney thing, where as Xavier knows this routine well. The VCU-UCLA game jumped off the screen at me as a possible upset because I thought it was a really tough draw for the Bruins. They have to go to Philly to play a dangerous VCU team but I’m a little worried about this game because UCLA is favored by 7. Also, I think UCLA could get to the Elite Eight if they end up playing Duke in the Sweet 16. However, to get there they would likely have to beat Villanova in Philly and I don’t see that happening. If Duke would have been going up against Cal in a possible 2-7 matchup I probably would have taken them to lose in the 2nd round. There was a time this season when I thought Duke was back but not anymore. I think they’ll get back to the Sweet 16—something that was once a mortal lock—because Texas has been so up and down. But I like Villanova to beat Duke and I like Pitt to win a tough game against Xavier. I’ll take Pitt over Villanova in an all Big East regional final.
South
First Round
#1 North Carolina over #16 Radford
#2 Oklahoma over #15 Morgan State
#3 Syracuse over #14 Stephen F. Austin
#4 Gonzaga over #13 Akron
#12 Western Kentucky over #5 Illinois
#6 Arizona State over #11 Temple
#7 Clemson over #10 Michigan
#8 LSU over #9 Butler
Second Round
#1 North Carolina over #8 LSU
#2 Oklahoma over #7 Clemson
#3 Syracuse over #6 Arizona State
#4 Gonzaga over #12 Western Kentucky
Regional Semifinals
#1 North Carolina over #4 Gonzaga
#2 Oklahoma over #3 Syracuse
Regional Finals
#1 North Carolina over #2 Oklahoma
This was a tough bracket for me. Butler always plays well in the tournament but I was unimpressed by their performance late in the season and in the Horizon Conference Tournament. I think they’ll be at a disadvantage athletically against LSU and I just have a feeling that there will not be a run for Butler this time. Western Kentucky was a knee jerk reaction because of their run last year but I’ve never been impressed by Illinois and they will not be at full strength for this game. Plus I didn’t think WK was a big risk because whoever wins that game will lose to Gonzaga in Portland in my opinion. I think this Gonzaga team is the best (or at least best equipped to make a run in the tournament) they’ve ever had but I just can’t pick them over UNC. The ASU-Temple game scares me because Temple comes in hot but I’ve believed in ASU all year so I’m going to stick with them. Either way I think the Cuse will win the 2nd round game. I don’t like the way Clemson finished the season. It took longer this time but eventually they faded just as they always do. I think Oklahoma will face Syracuse in the Sweet 16. This was a hard one to pick because I think Syracuse is capable of winning it all and Oklahoma has been struggling ever since Griffin’s concussions came on. However, this just seems like a trap. I’m sticking with Oklahoma and ultimately I’m sticking with North Carolina as well. Ty Lawson will play when the time comes.
National Semifinals
#1 Connecticut over #1 Louisville
#1 North Carolina over #1 Pittsburgh
National Championship
#1 North Carolina over #1 Connecticut
In the end I just decided to stick with what I felt going into the year: Carolina was the best, the Big East would get 3 in the Final Four, and Connecticut was the 2nd best. And there’s really no reason to be afraid of picking all #1 seeds.
Ranking every World Series in MLB history
-
Scandals, scapegoats, superstars and, yes, the Yankees. Sam Miller judges
every October since 1903.
3 years ago
