Making Sense of Selection Sunday

The highlights:

• 5 teams with 14 losses get in(only 6 teams with 14 losses let in from 1985-2010)
• Colorado and Virginia Tech snubbed
• UAB and VCU in the tournament
• Georgia a 10 seed??
• ACC is the most disrespected of the major conferences

I think that about covers it. There were 30 at-larges for power conferences and 7 for mid-majors. At first I was really upset that Clemson was in the play-in game and as the 12 seed. But then I realized we were probably the last team in. Which means that if Dayton or possibly even UTEP win their conferences then we are on the chopping block. How did USC in the pathetic Pac 10 jump us??

That means that the ACC got a 1 seed, a 2 seed, a 10 seed and a play-in. Practically 3 teams were put in. We made it in because we beat BC and VT in the head to head or we would have been out. Had we not beaten BC we would have been out. We need to win the ACC/Big Ten challenge and quit losing by one game so that we can wag that in people's faces--7 teams for the Big Ten?? Two of them with 14!!!!!!!!!!!! losses. Wow. Getting to the semi's in the ACC meant nothing this year. You do remember that the reigning national champs came from our conference right??

Here is my rational behind the snubs. The committee used the extra seeds as a chance to reward mid majors. That is partly why the push was made for expansion and so they were set on delivering. It would have been 32 majors and 5 mid-majors. However, if you are going to put Kansas State as a 5 seed and then not include a team that beat them 3 times then you are being stupid or stubborn. Now I am not saying Colorado doesn't have its flaws but VCU lost 6 Colonial division games and UAB was ousted from its conference tourney by East Carolina.

The committee had a mission and they fulfilled it. The last major takeaway is for anyone who wants to expand anything. Whenever you have a cut-line and whenever someone is left out there will be controversy and moaning and groaning. Its inherent to selection. This is the stupid argument made in football. If we only have an 8 team play-off then teams will be left out--well duh. And if you have a 64 team tourney then people will complain and a 68 and even a 96. (In football it is better to give eight teams a chance over just two, however)

Don't think that expansion somehow solves these kinds of problems. Go back to a 64 team tourney. How fair is it to play in Dayton and then fly to the next spot for the first game?? I thought we were having all the silly 16 seeds play each other so that first round game against the 1 seed might mean something. Oh well, Clemson will play UAB and have to break the press--something we don't do horribly well. At least this way we can win one game in the tourney!

West Virginia here we come!! (11 Big East teams...ugh)