Odd decisions by the committee

[Bill Marsh]

St Mary's finished the season with an RPI of 17. Normally that would equate to a 5-seed. Maybe a 4 under some circumstances. No matter, there's not AA dime's worth of difference between a 4-seed and a 5. BPI ranked St Mary's at #12. C,early this is a dangerous team that can do some damage as either a 4 or a 5. The committee dropped them to a 7-seed.

VCU finished the season with an RPI of 22. Normally a 6-seed. The committee dropped them to a 10 AND paired them with St Mary's in a 7-10 matchup.

Pity Arizona which earned a 2-seed only to find themselves in the 2nd round facing a team that is as strong as a 5 or a 6 by RPI instead of the 7 or 10 that they had every right to expect.

Let's follow this through with the assumption that St Mary's beats VCU as expected. St Mary's gets a shot at Arizona. IMO St Mary's can beat Arizona. The 2 teams are that close. If they do, the only thing between them and a rematch with Gonzaga is the Xavier-Florida State winner. It doesn't take a lot of imagination to see St Mary's winning that game too.

So I have to ask, why? Why put an undervalued 7-seed in the same region as the only other team in their conference, a team favored to get to the regional finals? They couldn't find a spot for St Mary's in another region?

Then there's the case of the Midwest region. At least Gonzaga & St Mary's can't meet until the finals and it would take a couple of upsets for that to happen. In the Midwest, Kansas is the #1 seed. They don't even have to wait for the finals to be matched up with a team from their conference. Iowa State is the 5-seed in the same region. It would hardly be a surprise if they beat Purdue in the 4-5 game. Since that can be anticipated in a toss up game, why do it?

Other less likely but still possible scenarios involve the East Region where Villanova is only a couple of upsets away from facing Marquette or PC and the Midwest where Purdue and Michigan State could be fighting it out to face Michigan.

I realize that some of this is unavoidable, but it makes no sense to set up the bracket such that teams have a legit shot at getting to a matchup with a conference rival who is favored to make the regional finals. The conference tournaments have already taken place. They're over. It should take a major upset to replay them.

[kayako]

Iowa St in the West would mean 2nd round matchup with WVU.
Iowa St switched with Minnesota would lead to 2nd round matchup between Minny and Purdue.
Switching Virginia and Iowa St works, but Virginia to MSG and Iowa St to Kansas City = $$$$

I don't like it, but they only promised no same conference matchups before sweet 16.

[Bill Marsh]

Iowa St in the West would mean 2nd round matchup with WVU.
Iowa St switched with Minnesota would lead to 2nd round matchup between Minny and Purdue.
Switching Virginia and Iowa St works, but Virginia to MSG and Iowa St to Kansas City = $$$$

I don't like it, but they only promised no same conference matchups before sweet 16.

Yes, I know what they promised and that their goals were to keep teams as close to home as possible and not to switch seed lines, but what the potential matchups they might end up with are nonsensical to me. It's compounded by the fact that they underseeded abunch of teams, starting with Wichita State, making upsets even more likely.

It's a national tournament, which means that it's supposed to be about national competition, not replaying games that already were played during the regular season and again during conference tournaments. The Sweet 16 is way too early for some of these matchups - especially when a win in the first round is virtually automatic 90-95% of the time for a lot of teams.