Its been a very unsurprising NCAA tournament for the most part. There have only been really three upsets (#11 VCU over #6 Duke, #11 Winthrop over #6 Notre Dame and #7 UNLV over #2 Wisconsin...you could say #6 Vanderbilt over # Washington State was a slight upset) and three #1 seeds and one #2 seed are left in the tournament. What does this mean?
1) The NCAA did a good job with the seedings for the most part, sans some questionable selections for the last at large teams into the tournament.
2) Despite a lot of parity in college basketball, the upper echelon teams were truly the upper echelon. In the Elite Eight, you had all the four #1 seeds (Kansas, Florida, North Carolina and Ohio State), plus three #2 seeds (Memphis, Georgetown and UCLA) and a #3 seed (Oregon).
3)The overall best teams during the entire season were the best teams in the tournament. Obviously with the NCAA tournament this is not the case. Often teams that play well during an entire year have flaws that come out in tournament times or are young teams. For the most part, the elite eight teams were veteran teams - Florida and UCLA were in the final last year, Georgetown, Oregon and Memphis had veteran leadership, and Kansas and North Carolina had the same starting lineups from last year. Only Ohio State has a relatively young team..but with Mike Conley Jr and Greg Oden, they have two of the best young players in the country.
This even flowed over to the NIT, where the final four teams left were all #1 seeds. Of course, playing on your home courts till the NIT Semifinals always helps.
Well, onto the predictions for the final four. Though everyone talks about the Hibbert-Oden matchup, the big matchup for the Georgetown - Ohio State game is whoever guards Jeff Green vs. Jeff Green. I really don't see Ivan Harris or Jamar Butler being able to stop Green. I think Hibbert and Oden will neutralize each other as will the guards Jonathan Wallace and Jessie Sapp. vs. Mike Conley Jr and Ron Lewis. Both teams have played some exciting come from behind wins, but I will take the veteran leadership of Georgetown along with the Jeff Green matchup. Hoyas win 78-71.
Florida vs UCLA - How often do you get a rematch of the championship game from the year before in the final four. Not often. This should be a better game than last year as the Bruins have more experience from last year. They play terrific defense and have solid guard play from Arron Affalo, Josh Shipp and Darren Collison. They matchup well with Taurean Green, Corey Brewer and Lee Humphrey. It will be interesting to see if Humphrey will be able to get his 3 point shots off this time. The key though is how UCLA will try to stop Al Horford and Joakim Noah. Lorenzo Mata and Luc Richard Mbah a Moute (love that name) have their work cut out for them. I think Florida will not be as susceptible to the mistakes that a young Kansas team had against the Bruins. Florida will take care of the ball better but win in a very close game, 70-67.
In the final, Florida matches up really well vs. Georgetown. I look for Joaquim Noah to give Jeff Green a really difficult time on the floor. That will be the difference in the Gators winning the championship for the second year in a row, again proving this basketball season, chalk matters.
"i disagree with what you said about the committee making a statement about syracuse playing non-conference home games. if they were, then why didn't the chairman say that. he never mentioned it as a factor. he mentioned a couple of other things that made no sense, but he never said that.
besides that, these committee members are well aware that syracuse puts fannies in the seats. they are at the top or nearly at the top at making money on home games. that makes an excellent pay day for schools who never make a dime on their athletic programs. the players love it, it is the biggest crowd they will ever play in front of their entire career, plus they get on tv or radio. it is well known that other big east schools, and the mid-majors syracuse traditionally plays, use the fact that they will play at the carrier dome as an incentive for recruiting. the committee is never going to make that statement because they will only be hurting all the teams that want to play there.
besides that, why don't you do a side by side comparison of syracuse's schedule with other schools on their level. syracuse gets a lot of attention because they receive an inordinate amount of publicity, but all schools do it.
also you should double check your facts regarding syracuse's schedule because there are errors there."
Jerome, first thanks for the comments. First, I would have had Syracuse in the tournament long before Stanford, Arkansas, Illinois and perhaps ODU. As we know, no bracket prognosticator, including me had Syracuse out of the tournament, especially with a 11-7 Big East conference record.However, I stand by my comments though, because several other college basketball analysts stated the same thing about Syracuse's non-conference road schedule. Despite whatever the committee chairman said, Syracuse's non conference record and schedule had to be the most determining factor in their exclusion from the tournament (the 3-7 record vs top 50 RPI teams might have also been a factor). Their non conference RPI was 122, which is very weak. Their only neutral site non conference game was a loss to Oklahoma State in the Jimmy V Classic.
Also, the committee should not decide who to put in based on which teams "put fannies in the seats". Its who the 34 best at large teams are. The committee decided Syracause wasn't one of them. I never had Syracuse as a bubble team, so I disagree with their decision to leave them out. Syracuse belonged in, so you and a lot of other Orange fans should be upset, and even more so after all the #12 seeds lost in the first round of the tournament.
That being said though, the committee had enough stats to go by their decision to leave the Cuse out. Also, I checked my facts, and all of them are correct, including Syracuse's 3-5 record vs Big East teams that made the tournament.
The next comment came from Bruce Adams.
"Any comments or rationale why Akron did not get picked for NIT with a 26-9 record, but Toledo, same MAC, but Western Div, got in w/ a pathetic 19 wins (1 more than my more than pathetic Miami SkinHawks with 18 wins, but...banked 3s!) We guessed that Akron didn't get in due to their coach's whining, nay-saying, bitching and moaning and blame-throwing post their defeat to Miami."
Bruce, I am sorry I didn't comment on Akron's exclusion from the NIT. I don't know if the MAC had a deal similar to the MAAC in that the NIT guaranteed a spot to the team with the best regular season conference record, which explains Marist's inclusion in the NIT (which they justified with their first round road win over Oklahoma State). If that's the case, Toledo was the #1 seed in the MAC conference tournament with a 14-2 conference record (as opposed to Akron's 13-3 record). If that wasn't the criteria, then you are right, there was very little reason to take Toledo over Akron. None. Akron had a RPI of 68 as opposed to Toledo's 94. The Zips also had wins over Niagara, Oral Roberts and Austin Peay, all NCAA tournament teams, plus a respectable two point loss to Nevada.
What might have hurt Akron was their loss at Toledo in the only game the two teams played. Also had they not stumbled to UALR in the College Basketball Experience Classic, the Zips would have played Texas Tech in the next round (and potentially Marquette in the championship).
There were several teams excluded from the NIT that I thought deserved in as well such as Bucknell or Washington, but Akron definitely had the most to gripe about. Its just another example of CM Newton and friends picking the good ole boys from Georgia and Alabama, two of the lower seeds in the SEC tournament before Akron.