Notent Notables - I (heart) brackets

I love Championship weekend. I had basketball on all weekend in background while I was grading midterms. I paid attention for the last few minutes of every close game. This evening, I thoroughly enjoyed the selection show for the first time since before the conspiracy of 2007. (Even last year, there was that tiny kernel of doubt...ugh. Scarred for life.) Now, I'm ready to bathe in the brackets. Here are my thoughts on SU, favorites, dark-horses, Cinderellas, Thad Matta, the Butler Bulldogs, and everything else I love about March.

(Note: I originally posted this Sunday night, then did some editing Monday afternoon.)

• The Duke-over-Syracuse controversy is only annoying to me in the post-2007 world. The other issue I have with the bracket is the Mississippi State snub. Ultimately, I have three problems with the way the committee chooses team. First of all, I don't like the make-up of the committee. I mean, look at these characters. "The dance of the living dead!" as the late, great Rodney Dangerfield/Al Czervik would put it. You're telling me athletic directors and conference commissioners, who have to manage rowing teams and volleyball tournaments, know more about college basketball than you or me? Let's get some coaches, or at least ex-coaches who know the intricacies of the game in there. Let's get some journalists into the room, who have less to gain or lose from the selection process.

• Another major problem with the selection process is consistency. The members of the committee serve five year terms, so the group is always made up mostly of holdovers. Still, they've made a lot of head scratching moves. Last year, Saint Mary's was the most infamous snub, missing apparently because their WCC schedule was too weak. This year, Utah State and UTEP edged out Illinois, Virginia Tech, and Mississippi State. Back in 2004, OK State won the Big 12 championship on selection Sunday, finishing with a 27-3 record while Duke lost the ACC championship to Maryland and finished 27-5. When Duke got the fourth 1-seed over OK-State, everyone wondered if the committee had even bothered to consider the Big 12 championship.

Apparently, Duke got the edge over Syracuse for the shorter trip to Houston (and the weakest bracket) because they won the ACC tournament while SU was bounced in the first round and its starting center has a day-to-day knee injury. Duke's 3 conference tourney wins came over powerhouses like Virginia, Miami, and Georgia Tech. Tech is the only tourney team of the bunch, and got a lower seed then all three of the teams that gave SU its four losses on the season: Pittsburgh, Louisville, and Georgetown. The conference tournament counts!

Meanwhile, Mississippi State lost in overtime of its conference tournament to the second best team on the committee's board, Kentucky. That game only went into overtime when Kentucky tied the game with a fraction of a second to go. It beat two tournament teams along the way: 10-seed Florida and 4-seed Vanderbilt. The conference tournament doesn't count! (Certainly, a team's actual on-the-court performance in its most recent games isn't considered. Why would it be? Well, it is for some, but not for others.)

Whatever. We'll forget about those crappy teams that missed the tournament soon. Still, the committee could be better. Here's my idea:

What if Joe Lunardi and four other Bracketologists put the bracket together? And what if the bracket Lunardi posted every week wasn't just his best guess, it was the official tournament bracket? And what if Lunardi and Co. released updated brackets daily every day of Championship Week? CBS would lose out on the ratings of the selection show, but college basketball's regular season would gain attention as the casual fan gained an appreciation for way regular season games affect the post-season. You know how college football fans claim they have the best regular season of any sport because it feels like every week matters? It'd be closer to that, only with a tournament at the end that fairly determines a champion. What's the problem?

• Okay, that was a long Notable...I'll make them shorter. My other suggestion for the committee: consider head-to-head results. I know its imperfect because so few teams play head-to-head. Still, I would have been furious if West Virginia had edged Syracuse for a 1-seed because the Orange beat the Mountaineers in the regular season. If teams are really close on the committee's board, head-to-head can factor in, with the most recent meeting breaking any ties.
  

• But enough complaining. It's time for my first prediction: Evan Turner will make the #1 draft pick a heavy debate between him and John Wall by the end of the tournament.

• I know I was down on West Virginia before. I changed my mind. Don't get me wrong, Huggins is still a weak game coach. Da'Sean Butler makes up for it though. I should've learned this before he took over the Garden this weak. Against Syracuse, he realized in the second half, "Geez, my coach's offensive planning doesn't make any sense. I better take this game over or we're going to lose!" Butler shot poorly in that game, but he contributed across the box score and hit some key shots down the stretch. Now he's playing better than ever. I think they get to the Elite Eight at least.

• Look out Villanova. They're playing poorly; clearly they're the weakest 2-seed. And in the second round, Richmond could spring an upset. They've got a little guard, Kevin Anderson, who can really catch fire.

• I love Butler. They're my secret mid-major crush... my "Mila Kunis," if you will. But a 5-seed seems really high. I don't understand how the Bulldogs get a 5, but Gonzaga gets an 8 and Cornell gets a 12. (While we're at it, Gonzaga is Isla Fisher and Western Kentucky is Denise Richards, because the Hilltoppers haven't made a run recently, but they retain a place in my heart. Also, the Hilltopper is insanely awesome, while Denise is just insane.)
  
• Speaking of mid-majors, Siena gets flailing 4-seed Purdue. The Boilermakers literally played like crap Saturday.

• Setting aside my love of the Orange, if I could go to every game at one 1st and 2nd round location, I would go to Spokane or Providence. In Spokane, Siena and Utah State could both spring upsets, and if the other pod goes chalk, you get Tom Izzo v. Gary Willliams in round 2. In Providence, you've got the weakest 2-seed (Nova) with one of two good mid-majors looming in the second round. The other Providence pod has a solid San Diego State taking on a streaky Tennessee team. Georgetown could make a run in the tournament, but never underestimate the Mwacky MAC, as I like to call them. This year Ohio survived the MAC bloodbath, and draws the Hoyas.

• Duke beware. A 16-seed has never beaten a 1-seed, of course. But I would like to bring up my play-in game theory prediction: the first 16-seed to pull off the upset will come out of the play-in game. It gives them a chance to build momentum and get comfortable in the arena. Of course, whenever there has been a close 16-1 game, it hasn't been the 16 coming from the play-in game. So I'm probably wrong. (Vermont! A 16-seed! AAHH!)

• Kentucky has some fabulous talent, but they seem to play down to their opponents. The Miss St game didn't make any sense on in the background. Over and over, I'd look up and see the Wildcats making some ridiculous offensive play, but somehow they trailed most of the game. They'll catch a team playing well - Temple, maybe - and lose before the Final Four.

• Potential George Mason (double-digit seed that makes a deep run): Hmmm... I'll go with Old Dominion. They've got tourney experience. Plus, they play in George Mason's conference

• Potential Harold "The Show" Arceneaux (player on tiny school who wins a game or two): Aubrey Coleman, guard, 13-seed Houston. Can I interest you in the nation's leading scorer at 25.6 ppg? What if I told you he bested his own scoring average against major teams like Memphis (W), Oklahoma (W), Miss St (L), Iowa St. (L), and Memphis (W) again? Does that do anything for you?

• Potential 2003 Syracuse (3 or 4-seed that gets hot and wins it all): Has to be 3-seed Georgetown, right? When they play well, they can beat anyone. Rebounding is literally their Achilles heel, though.

• As for the Orange, I threw up in my mouth a little when I saw they had Vermont in the 1st round, followed by Gonzaga, likely, in the 2nd. Then I reminded myself they are playing in Buffalo, and that Vermont of 2010 isn't Vermont of 2005. Further down the road, I do not want to face Pittsburgh again. My buddy Dr. Paul says he's not afraid to face Pitt at this point, but if Pitt makes it that far, that means they're playing well. And if they're playing well, they have SU's number. Luckily, I think they'll get knocked off before then. Kansas State is tough, but so are most of the 2-seeds. I would both love (it'd be a good game) and hate (it'd be a good game) to play them in round 4. Kansas would probably be waiting in the Final Four, but you have to beat the best to be the best. And the Best get Better, etc., etc.

• Ultimately, I'm standing by the gut feeling I've had about SU all season. They could be a final four team if they play their best, but there are too many explosive teams standing between the Orange and the championship. In 2003, I told everyone before the tournament that the field was wide open, and we could be the ones who got hot and won it all. This year I feel like its the opposite; the field is wide open, and we're the kind of team that gets knocked off by the hot team. I'd be satisfied with Elite Eight and out in a great game against K-State or Pitt. I'd be happy with the Final Four. And beyond that... ...

• Initial bracket picks: The Elite Eight! Kansas over Ohio State. Syracuse over Kansas State. West Virginia over Temple. Duke over...who knows? Notre Dame, maybe?! (That's right, all four 1-seeds make the final 4. I'll probably change my mind by Thursday.)

• The championship: Kansas over West Virginia. I'm sick of the experts saying..."There are no great teams this year. Kansas is as close as you get." Kansas is great. They'll win it all.