A Few Thoughts about the Field of 64

First of all, let me apologize up front to those of you who may have recently read my last two posts. They were rife with grammatical and spelling errors. I wrote and posted those entries without giving them a thorough edit. I'm sorry for my sloppiness. I have reread the posts and made the appropriate edits.

The NCAA Tournament field of 64 -- the play-in game is ridiculous and needs to go -- was announced yesterday, and I just wanted to share a few thoughts that jumped out at me immediately upon perusing the brackets.

Tennessee was given a No. 2 seed in the Washington region. This has befuddled me to no end. The Vols had an atrocious end to its season, and while it's deserving of its ranking in the AP poll and deserving of a high seed, the No. 2 is unjustified. I see the Vols as more of a 4 or 5 seed. Within their bracket even, there's a better team that was more deserving of the 2 spot. It's North Carolina. A UNC-Tennessee match up today would yield an unfavorable result for the Vols. Looking further, teams like Boston College and Florida, which were given a No. 4 and No. 3 seed, respectively, are better than Tennessee. The Vols will have a tough contest in the second round, though, where they'll probably see Seton Hall. My next problem was with Boston College's low seeding. They're a No. 4 in the Minneapolis region. This is a team that hit its stride after an early rough patch and finished 11-5 in its first season in the ACC. Then, it played its way into the ACC Tournament title game, narrowly losing to Duke in a game the Eagles should have won. They deserved better. They earned a No. 2 seed, in my opinion.

It's hard to believe that Air Force and George Mason got bids to the Tournament. Teams like Hofstra, Michigan, Cincinnati and Florida State probably should've received those spots. In the same vein, what's the justification for admitting Arizona and Wisconsin ahead of other 19-win teams like FSU and Michigan and Maryland. It's tough to figure how 19 wins out west (Arizona) is better than 19 wins back east (FSU). George Washington got jobbed by the committee. Granted, their schedule is weak, but their leading scorer, Pops Mensah-Bonsu, was injured for the A10 Tournament, thus their first-round exit to Temple was not a shocker. I think a 6 or 7 seed would have been more appropriate for GW than an 8, which will likely result in a second-round game against Duke, if GW gets by UNC-W first.

Duke should not have received the No. 1 overall seed. They won the ACC Championship, that's true. But all season, we've heard endlessly about how the Big East was a better conference, which seemed to bear out after the seedings were announced. The Big East got 8 bids. The ACC received four. UConn should've been the No. 1 overall seed. They are, after all, going to win the whole thing. Duke, I predict will be eliminated by LSU in the Sweet 16. Finally, Conference USA received two bids, one for Memphis, obviously well deserved, and one for UAB, a puzzler. They're 24-6 but to call their strength of schedule weak would be the understatement of this young century. They have one quality win against Memphis, but they were noncompetitive in the C-USA Tournament final against the Tigers. They really don't deserve to be in this field. Additionally, I wish someone from the committe would tell me why GW is an 8 an UAB is a 9.

Overall, though, I think the selection committee did a pretty good job this season. I don't have nearly as many complaints this year as I have in years past.

THE BRACKETS