NCAA Tourney 2007 – Keeping the Middle Man Down

I have to vent for a little bit. In case anyone wasn’t aware, the NCAA Tournament basically announced itself as being crooked as hell. The number of at-large bids for mid-major conferences has gone down by 2 bids each of the last 2 years. Clearly, there’s an agenda here, which is to ensure that teams like George Mason aren’t able to disrupt the big-6 conferences and their chances. This agenda has never been more clear than the disturbing trend of having mid-major conferences play each other in the 1st round, and this year, they even play each other in the 2nd round! It is true that one mid-major is guaranteed this year between Memphis-Nevada-Creighton. But, rather than being guaranteed one measly sweet 16 spot, I’d much rather see the “secret committee” have the power conferences 5th and 6th place teams take on the 2nd and 3rd place teams from the mid-majors so we can see who is the best, and if the mid-majors place three to six teams in the sweet 16, then SO BE IT. Instead, the “secret committee” has greatly reduced the chances of multiple mid-majors making the sweet 16. Also note, that this trend didn't start this year - 2003 - Creighton vs. Central Michigan, 2002 - Gonzaga vs. Wyoming are other examples I can think of off the top of my head.

Now, back to the fun stuff… the MARCH MADNESS! (which I will keep watching, even though the “secret committee” is evil, and probably is similar to the Stonecutters).

Best 1st round matchup: Notre Dame-Winthrop - I think the winner of this game will make the Sweet 16 and will take down Oregon with ease. Actually, with Wisconsin missing their best forward, its entirely likely that the winner of the Notre Dame-Winthrop game could make the Elite 8!

Most anticipated 2nd round matchup: Georgetown- BC – I really struggled this year to find a good 2nd round matchup. This has a sweet storyline of BC being punished for leaving the Big East. Dr. Hibbert may have to use the anesthetic.

Region of Death: As Mighty pointed out, its clearly the East Region. (UNC, Texas, Mich. St., Wash. St., Georgetown, USC)

Cinderella Final 4 Team: In 2005 I picked Utah which as a 6-seed made the sweet 16, last year I picked UCLA, though that really wasn’t a Cinderella by any means. This year? I’m going with the Maryland Terrapins. It’s insane, I know. But, Florida has the easiest region by far, and there really aren’t any other teams in their region that I can see giving them trouble. After 4 weeks of research, pouring through statistics, and evaluating 4 conferences, I grew to really like Maryland’s resume, plus the fact that they play great defense, have capable big men, and can shoot from the outside. Plus, I love teams that crash out of their conference tournaments, because then they play with a chip on their shoulder. In addition, Darryl Strawberry’s son plays for Maryland. I’m just hoping we see a lot of him this next month, so I can continue my good fortune picking Cinderellas.

Darkhorses: Georgia Tech and Nevada – Both could lose in the first round, or both could get by their #2-seeds (Wisconsin, and Memphis respectively). I haven’t heard anything about Memphis, other than that they play in a crappy conference. Plus, Nevada got knocked off last year in the 1st round, when they were like a 5-seed, so I don’t think Fazekas will let that happen again. As for Georgia Tech, I’ve read they’re really inconsistent, but their freshman guard, Crittendon, is supposed to be sweet.

Now, on to the rules I've devised to analyze the tournament! If you want to see the rules I’ve devised, check out the link to 2005’s blog article. http://thedawggs.blogspot.com/2005_03_01_thedawggs_archive.html

Rule#3: When a non-1 seed wins, it happens in 2 straight years
That’s right, a 1-seed (UNC, OSU, Florida, Kansas) WILL win this year We are due.

Rule#4: A 12-seed always beats a 5 (except in 2000)
Old Dominion over Butler maybe (Butler has NO inside game). USC-Arkansas could be a really interesting game as well.

Rule#6: There always is one conference w/ multiple teams in the final 4
Every year since 1999!
My favorite options:
1) Kansas, Maryland, UNC, Texas A&M (I can’t choose between the Big 12 and ACC for some reason)
2) Kansas, Florida, Texas, Ohio St. (Big 12)
3) UCLA, Florida, Wash. St., Ohio St. (Pac 10)
4) Kansas, Florida, UNC, Tennessee (SEC)
5) Pitt, Florida, Georgetown, OSU (Big East)
6) Kansas, Wisconsin, UNC, OSU (Big 10)

Rule#9: If you win your power conference tourney, you won't do well in the NCAA tourney. (Exception: top 10 teams)
Last year was an amazing year for Rule #9 – when 3 teams qualified as winning their power conference tourney, and not finishing in the top 10 (Syracuse, Iowa, and Kansas) and they ALL lost in the 1st round. Unfortunately, we can’t rely much on this rule because only one team qualifies – Oregon. I find it highly amusing that Oregon is playing my alma mater Miami University, so maybe there’s a chance that Miami doesn’t get killed by 20 (though I’m not counting on it!). The more likely scenario is that the Notre Dame-Winthrop winner exposes Oregon for not playing any defense.

Rule #10: The favorite almost NEVER survives the “Region of Death” (Duke in 2004 made the Final 4), and certainly will never win the whole tournament.
I went back through 1997 and tried to determine what my “region of death” was (a subjective assessment indeed). Out of the 10 years I analyzed, only 3 #1 seeds made it through, and only 1 won the whole damn thing (UNC – 2005). Funny, because this year, UNC is CERTAINLY in the Region of Death, who may have to deal with Kevin Durant and Texas in the sweet 16 and then either Wash. St or Georgetown in the Elite 8.

Experimental Rule 11: The 1-seed with the worst Sagarin strength of schedule will NOT make the Final 4.
I only have data from the last 4 tournaments, which so far has produced only one Final 4 team (Illinois). This year’s target? Florida, by a fraction of a point. I’m still thinking this is only an experimental rule.