March Madness 2008 - Instantaneous Analysis

One of the greatest day in sports is the day the brackets come out (at least in my humble opinion). Now, it's time for everyone in America to suddenly become basketball experts! Let's take a look at how this year's bracket shapes up:

Best 1st round matchup- USC vs. Kansas St. - No question in my mind... USC's prized freshman in OJ Mayo battling the one-man team of Kansas State and player of the year Michael Beasley. It's a juicy matchup, plus it really is unclear if USC has the big men to slow Beasley down enough to win the game. The other exciting thing about this game is that the winner gets to play Wisconsin, in a truly difficult 2nd round game... eesh.

Most anticipated 2nd round matchup – First, a little history lesson proving how my personal anticipated 2nd round matchup often never happens.
In 2007 my “anticipated” matchup actually happened [Boston College vs. former Big East rival Georgetown], but 2007’s 2nd round matchups were relatively weak.
In 2006, my matchup [Mich. St. vs. UNC] never happened as George Mason wiped out Mich. St. then UNC.
In 2005, I didn’t specifically anoint one matchup, but I alluded to the Kansas-Wisconsin game, but Bucknell took out Kansas in the 1st round to prevent that from happening
This year, I've got two games I'm looking at, both in the same region: the sexy one is UNC-Indiana. Yes, Indiana has come across some tough times now and haven't looked as good at late but they still have two super players in the inside-outside combination of Eric Gordon (freshman guard) and senior big-man DJ White. The other matchup I'm looking at is Washington State vs. Notre Dame. Both teams suffered disappointing exits last year (Wash St in the 2nd round, Notre Dame in the 1st) and both should be focused on revenge and using the 3-pointer as their dagger. Honorable mention goes out to the Butler-Tennessee game, also in the bottom half of the UNC region.

Region of Death- UNC's region! Without question, it's the hardest, which is unfair, considering that UNC is the "#1 overall seed". This region has it all: best 2-seed (Tennessee), top-10 ranked mid-major (Butler), successful Big East teams (Louisville, Notre Dame), an experienced PAC-10 team (Wash. St.) and even an underachieving, but very talented team (Indiana). I was all excited before the tournament to have Tennessee and UNC play each other - just not in the regional finals. Now, I'm scared we won't even see that.

Cinderella Final 4 Team- I haven’t been very successful with this, though I did break the rules and just picked UCLA as a “Cinderella 2-seed” in 2006. This year, I'm going with USC. Beyond having OJ Mayo, USC also plays great team defense. Granted, it's going to take a miracle for them to survive almost all of the best big men in the country in Beasley (Kansas St), Beard (Wisconsin), then Hibbert (Georgetown), just to reach a more favorable matchup against Kansas.
Darkhorses:
Xavier – Xavier could really benefit if UCLA’s big men Mbah a Moute [ankle sprain] and Kevin Love [back spasms] aren’t able to get healthy soon. It stinks having an injury situation like this for UCLA, so hopefully, there will be some news on their players’ health before Thursday, though the coaches probably won’t say much of anything definitively.
Marquette - They are the opposite of Stanford who they play in the 2nd round. Could be an interesting darkhorse pick since they are battle-tested in the Big East, and they have a big marquee victory over Wisconsin.

Team that got Royally Screwed Over: Butler - Not only did the Selection Committee bump them down a number of seeds for not having many (any?) quality wins, they bumped them to a 7-seed. Then, to add insult to injury, they are playing in Alabama... and their 1st round opponent just happens to be a school in the state of Alabama! Oh... and Butler's prize for winning the 1st round? A date with Tennessee in the 2nd round!

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 on the "Rules of Engagement".

Rule#4: A 12-seed always beats a 5 (except in 2000 and 2007)- In 2001, the year after all the 12-seeds lost, two 12-seeds one games, and one even went to the sweet 16. This year, each of the 5-seeds should be cautiously selected. I like Temple over Mich. St. and Villanova over Clemson as the better choices.

Rule#6: There always is one conference w/ multiple teams in the final4 (except in 2007) – My favorite options:
UNC, USC, UCLA, Texas (PAC-10)
UNC, Kansas, UCLA, Stanford (PAC-10)
Tennessee, Vanderbilt, UCLA, Memphis (SEC)
Louisville, Georgetown, UCLA, Memphis (Big East)
UNC, Kansas, Duke, Texas (ACC)

Rule 8 - The MAC has never gone consecutive years w/o winning a tourney game (well, since 1994 anyway and the MAC Depression of 2004-2007).
I’m expecting Kent St. to end the streak this year. Granted, this may not be a good expectation, because my alma mater, the Miami Redhawks, almost took them out in the semifinals in what turned into a steel cage match because the refs just “wanted to let them play.” Kent St. only has two quality wins all season (St. Mary’s, in the bracket buster and Illinois State back in November). I’m curious to see how Kent St. performs this time in the tournament.

Rule#9: If you win your power conference tourney, you won't do well in the NCAA tourney. (Exception: top 10 teams):
In 2005, one team lost in the 1st round, the other in the 2nd round
In 2006, all 3 that qualified got bounced in the 1st round.
In 2007, one team qualified [Oregon], but they made the elite 8. I still say Oregon had an easy draw though.
In 2008, Pitt (Big East) and Georgia (SEC) are the only teams that qualified. Georgia is a 14-seed playing Xavier and Georgia's miracle run will end then. As for Pitt, this gets a bit trickier, as they are playing in a relatively weaker foursome (Pitt-Oral Roberts, Mich. St-Temple). The rules have treated me well, so I will place Pitt as a 2nd-round loser.

Experimental Rule #11: The 1-seed with the worst Sagarin strength of schedule will NOT make the Final 4.
Actually, this rule doesn’t work well at all. In the 3 years of data I have, Illinois and Florida already bucked the trend (and Florida won anyways). Granted, Kansas was fractions of a point behind Florida and ended up bowing out in the Elite Eight. This year, Memphis is the clear loser, so I will avoid them and their awful free throw shooting.