Someone please tell me the committee's rationale for dropping the Vols from a one seed to the lowest two seed, eighth overall.

Tennessee's victories over NCAA Tourney teams....
Memphis - 1 seed
Xavier- 3 seed
Vandy - 4 seed
Miss St - 8 seed
Ark- 9 seed
Gonzaga - 7 seed
W. Va - 7 seed
UK - 11 seed
Temple - 12 seed
W. KY - 12 seed
UGA (twice) - 14 seed

Anybody else even close?

To say Wisconsin got shafted is an understatement...all season they've lagged behind texas in the rankings despite a better record and a head to head win. I blame it on their unglamorous defensive style.

Tennessee got NO respect from the committee. They have a tough road ahead of them. UT should be in the midwest if it really came down to them and Kansas. UNC didn't really get much help from the committee either. They have don't have an east road for an over all #1 seed.

how does UCLA always end playing in CA during the tournament?

TN has the number 1 RPI and SOS...how are we not a number 1 seed? horrible job by committee.

UCLA & Duke both got an easy road. Duke especially is in a lame bracket.

Xavier is not a #3 seed.

If UCLA is healthy though, they easily advance.

Memphis had good non-conference wins, but no 'stellar' wins.

Wisconsin should have been #2 out West and traded places with Duke.

The South is the hardest bracket to gauge, any of the top 4 seeds cold win the South.


Final Four:

UNC over Louisville
Kansas over USC
UCLA over Georgia
Pittsburgh over Stanford

My very first comments after watching the selection show -- Tennessee and Wisconsin got the shaft. I just want the committee to explain those two. How can you make Tennessee basically the 8th seed in the tournament, with the #1 RPI and #1 SOS? HOW???? How can you give Duke and 2 seed and give Wisconsin a 3???? HOW????? SOMEONE EXPLAIN THAT!!!!

Texas.
UCLA - 1 seed
Kansas - 1 seed
Tennessee- 2 seed
Oklahoma (3 times) - 6 seed
Kansas St. - 11 seed
Texas A&M - 9 seed
Baylor (twice) - 11 seed
Oral Roberts- 13 seed

Not to mention the Big 12 is a much tougher conference than the SEC.

Wisconsin, like Tennessee, should be feeling shafted. The selection committee must've really hated the Big Ten, seeing that the team that won both the conference's regular-season title and its postseason tournament was handed a No. 3 seed. Duke, meanwhile, which won neither the ACC nor the ACC tournament, is nicely set up in the West Region as a No. 2. (The Blue Devils did beat the Badgers head-to-head, but that shouldn't have been the deciding factor here.)

Perhaps the deciding factor was the fact that more than half the teams in the Big Ten were complete dogmeat. Strength of schedule obviously played a major role in a number of the committee's decisions, and there really wasn't a comparison between the two. And it was a *24-point* head to head win.

But yes, Tennessee did get screwed.

what about butler? Ranked 14th, wins its conference tourney, gets a #7?

Two comments: Duke should have been a three-seed at best. They stumbled badly down the stretch. Instead, they get rewarded with the easiest road to the elite eight of any 2 seed. Second, UT got the shaft. Was the committee wanting to see a UNC-UT game that badly?

I am a Tn fan but i dont mind Tennessee with a two seed but we now get to see how Duke always gets the easy way out with one of the easiest regions. Tennessee deserves to play in the east not the south. Thank you Mark Slyve for sticking up for the SEC.

OK, I'm a Tar Heel fan who can't stand Duke. But Luke, you conveniently failed to mention that Duke didn't just beat Wisconsin, they crushed them by 25 in a game that was never in doubt. Combine that with the fact that the ACC once again proved to be better than the Big Ten, and Duke only had one more loss than Wisconsin, and I think this was a pretty easy call.

Does Duke get to take their refs out west too? It would be a cakewalk to the final 8 for them if they were really worthy of a 2 seed.

I agree with Swizz in the fact UNC got a bad deal. They were the victim of Tennessee's bad deal. There is no way the nation's #1 team should have to play (another should have been) #1 seed to advance to the final four.

Duke has an EASY draw. They should cruise to the Elite 8 and then they go head to head with UCLA. Singler handled Love in High School and I'm sure he can still handle him.

When Tennessee loses to Butler all of this talk will end, thank god.

When Tennessee loses to Butler and, if not them, Carolina we will all see how overrated the vols are

I'm not going to argue against Tennessee for a one seed, but Kansas did play USC, Arizona, Georgia Tech, and Boston College in the non-conferece as well as the Big XII slate including OU, K-State, Baylor, A&M, and Texas. KU can't be faulted for the poor performance of some of their non-conference opponents and all three losses were close conference games on the road. KU is deserving of a one seed.

THANK YOU SELECTION TEAM FOR NOT PUTTING THE OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY INTO THE DANCE. I HATE OSU ALONG WITH THE BIG 10. THEY KEEP GETTING GIFTS IN FOOTBALL BEFORE GETTING TORCHED. WATCH! IT'LL HAPPEN AGAIN NEXT YEAR. THEY'LL SNEAK INTO THE NC AND GET WAXED BY USC BY 35 NEXT YEAR.

Hey Ben - UCLA has to play in Phoenix (NOT in California) in the Sweet 16 and Elite Eight as they will likely make it that far.

California is a pretty big place last time I checked - travelling from LA to Oakland as they did two years ago, or to Sacramento last year is a long trip, longer than many teams that just have to cross state lines - that doesn't make it necessary a longer trip.

Here's the REAL question - why does either UNC or Duke ALWAYS have some gravy train freebie with at least one and likely two rounds in North Carolina...look at the history, it's ridiculous!



They earned it all

Regarding Tennessee's 12 victories against the field, how about Texas' 12:
UCLA - 1 seed
Kansas - 1 seed
Tennessee - 2 seed (won by 19)
Oklahoma (thrice) - 6 seed
Texas A&M - 9 seed
St Mary's - 10 seed
Kansas State - 11 seed
Baylor (twice) - 11 seed
Oral Roberts - 13 seed

Wisconsin easily got the biggest shaft, followed by Tennessee...
Reasons Wisc. got shafted:
1.) Duke: didn't get regular season or tourney championship, and struggled down the stretch
2.) Texas: Beat them head to head, Texas no championships either
3.) Georgetown: Wisc. better record all year, higher ranking, and Georgetown upset in their tournament

Easy to see how Wisconsin should have been awarded a 2 seed...they are ranked 6th in the country, and won both the regular season and tournament championships in the Big Ten, and compare favorable to three of the four 2 seeds

Bucky badger is underrated but maybe being under the radar is one of their keys to success. I love their deliberate play. Tennessee has to control their emotions and play a little defense. They have the talent. Marquette is a sleeper with incredible talent and watch out for Oregon to prolong Ernie Kent's career with a good run. I bet the sweet sixteen will include the above teams.

Tennessee got blown out by Texas on a neutral court. Kansas lost to Texas by three on the road and beat them by 10 in the Big 12 championship game. Tennessee failed to get to the conference tournament championship game in a conference ranked 6th in strength by Ken Pomeroy. Kansas only had 3 losses compared to Tennessee's four and all were in road games in a conference ranked #1 overall by Ken Pomeroy. Kanasas won the regular season and conference tournament. The argument of efficiency (which is a very good way of ranking teams) is made in the article when it outlines the fact that Kansas has by far the best efficiency margin in the country. Tennessee did not deserve to be a number 1 seed more than Kansas did.

I'm not a fan of any of these teams I'm listing, but I like to pull for mid majors. How does Butler only get a 7 seed, and how does Dayton, Illinois St get left out for the likes of Arizona, Oregon, or Villinova? The same arguements used to get these big school teams in (injuries, SOS, RPI) are reasons used against the mids... crazy!

To whomever suggested UNC got a raw deal because they have to play a "should have been a No. 1 seed": do you think the committee should have just placed UNC in the final four automatically? Every team that makes it to the final four will have to play a few difficult games against premier teams. UNC got a No. 1 seed, what more can you reasonably ask for?

Tennessee may or may not have gotten screwed. If Tennessee doesn't lose in their conference tournament, they sit on the #1 line. They lost, and put the decision into the committee's hands. That happens when you don't take care of business.

That being said, the seedings are objective. If the committee can find no clear reason to place one team ahead of another, they must use their gut feelings. This is where Tennessee loses out. From someone to whom college basketball is almost a religious experience, and who watches EVERY game available on my cable package (Gotta love DVR), in a head to head matchup, Kansas would beat Tennesse eight out of ten times, and run them out of the gym five out of ten times.

RPI and SOS do carry some weight, but so do efficiency ratings and the Pomeroy ratings. Kenpom. com has Kansas #1 by a rather large margin, and #1 in both offensive and defensive efficiency. Their margin of victory is also #1.

Both teams had something to offer, but outside of Tennessee fans, most people could watch the tape and see Kansas is a beter team.

"Wisconsin, like Tennessee, should be feeling shafted. The selection committee must've really hated the Big Ten, seeing that the team that won both the conference's regular-season title and its postseason tournament was handed a No. 3 seed. Duke, meanwhile, which won neither the ACC nor the ACC tournament, is nicely set up in the West Region as a No. 2. (The Blue Devils did beat the Badgers head-to-head, but that shouldn't have been the deciding factor here.)

Perhaps the deciding factor was the fact that more than half the teams in the Big Ten were complete dogmeat. Strength of schedule obviously played a major role in a number of the committee's decisions, and there really wasn't a comparison between the two. And it was a *24-point* head to head win.

But yes, Tennessee did get screwed."



Good explanation, but do you care to explain how this logic works considering Wisconsin also beat Texas, another #2, on their home court? UW lost to 3 teams all year, a #2 seed and 2 #6 seeds, and was 10-0 to finish the season. Duke meanwhile finished the year 6-4, and had a 13 point loss to NIT bound Wake Forest as well as losses to Pitt, UNC, Clemson and Miami.

If head to head match-ups mattered, then ASU would be in the tournament and UA would be at home, so that argument is out the window.

You can call the Big Ten dogmeat, but everyone seems to think very highly about the potential of Indiana and MSU in this tourney, two teams that UW beat twice.

As for strength of scedule, UW is 61 and Kansas is 50, why does that only factor in for UW?

If you can't see that this was a complete shaft job, you need to take off you tinted blue glasses.

Thank you for noting how WI got shafted (to say the least). I've heard some argue that Duke beat WI easily so they deserve to be seeded higher.

By that rationale, WI should certainly be a #2 seed instead of Texas who they beat earlier in the year.

No expected this WI team to be this good and it's very disappointing to see them disrespected like this.

Texas A&M advances to Sweet 16 - you heard it here first. WTAW!!!!!!

UCLA's "trainer". You obviously haven't been around sports long enough. Please use proper terminology. We are called Athletic Trainers. Thank you.

I can't believe nobody is talking about how bad Butler got screwed by the committee... Them as a 7 seed is the one thing from the entire bracket that blows my mind. They went 29-3, won the conference regular season, won their conference tournament, have the #16 RPI, are 9-1 over their last 10 games, and don't have a bad loss, but do have some decent out of conference wins (VT, TT, OSU, FSU, Bradley, at SIU). And not only are they a 7 seed, but they have to face a strong USA team in the first round IN BIRMINGHAM, ALABAMA!!! And then if they get past USA they face a Tennessee team that arguably should have been a 1 seed. What a joke. And it's a bigger joke that the talking heads are too busy whining about teams like Arizona State (with their .500 conference record and whopping 81 RPI) to talk about what an injustice this is (for both Butler and Tennessee, who is likely going to have a ridiculous 2nd round matchup). Way to go committee--at least nobody will accuse you of having any in-state biases.

I don't think Tenn is going to make it that far in the tourney. The SEC is weak this year, and UT lacks a low post presence. Lofton gives them a chance because he is one of the best shooters I've seen, but even my lowly Gators (who did not deserve to be in the tourney this year) were spanking UT in the first half of each game, and if we had one more big man we would have won the home game.

I think a 2 seed is about right.

Why is no one talking about Georgetown? A deserving two seed that returns all but one (and gained some new young guns) from a final four team last year is not getting any love from the media. With the exception of the Pitt game their play in the end of the year and into the Big East tournament was as good if not better than any team in the country. Look for Roy Hibbert not to blind you with big stat lines, but impact using his presence inside and huge games from the outside threats of Wallace, Summers, Freeman and Chris Wright.

For all of those complaining about Duke being a #2 seed over Wisconsin, lets not forget Duke played in a tougher conference, had a stronger schedule and may be most importantly beat Wisconsin by 25 head to head! Come on people, your hatred for Duke shouldn't blind the obvious.

I can see to an extent why Kansas was 4th seed, but if so, Tennessee should have been 5th not 8th. And UCLA should have had 2 losses that the refs gave them in the last 2 weeks.

Where did Luke Winn go to college? I sense some bias here toward Tennessee. Although I like Tennessee, Texas clearly plays in the best basketball conference top to bottom. Plus they beat UCLA, Tennessee, Kansas, and a whole slew of seeded teams during the season. Tennessee has no real gripe coming. C'mon Winn, get real.

Wisconsin got beat by duke...by 25. But didn't ASU beat Arizona X2, yet Arizona got in over ASU. To say that the head-to-head competition should give Duke the advantage over Wisconsin is short-sided. Wisconsin is on a 10-game winning streak and playing much better basketball than Duke at this time.

For the "bonehead" that thinks Tennessee will lose to Butler, get real. Call us overrated, call us whatever you want to...but our season statistics speak for themselves. We've played in very hostile environments, and won most of those games. Yeah, Butler beat us bad last year in the pre season NIT..but we are an entirely different team this year and will prove it on the court this year.

Personally, I think Kansas sharing the regular season Big 12 title and winning the Big 12 Tourney trumps any intra-SEC achievements that Tennessee had.

I'm not a slave to the RPI, and apparently, neither is the committee. They actually used their eyes and clearly, and correctly, saw that Kansas was the better team. Too many too-close wins for Tennessee has me worried about their postseason prospects, and it wouldn't surprise me if the committee had the same thoughts.

I think the 2 seed was deserved. However, they got the worst possible draw...and I'm not talking about UNC. Tennessee relies on opponents' turnovers to be able to succeed. And look who might be waiting for them in the second round...Butler, who simply doesn't turn the ball over. This could be BIG trouble for Tennessee.

Was there a time last night when you said, "Man, I'm glad Arizona (or Villanova or Oregon) is in here."?

I think their 14, 13 and 12 losses, respectively, have given them ample chance to prove their worthiness.

As a Wisconsin fan, I'm glad they got the #3 seed, because it keeps them in the Midwest and gives them a little bit of a home-court advantage.

"Posted: March 16, 2008 8:25 PM by ben
how does UCLA always end playing in CA during the tournament?"

Because if you win the PAC-10 and are in the Top-10 rankings you will always get a high seed in the Western Region. It just happens that lately the West Region's first games have been in California, but that's not always the case every year.

In response to Wisconsin winning 10 straight so they should be higher than Duke, Davidson has won 22 straight so going by your criteria they should be a #1 seed. Compare Duke's RPI and Strength of Schedule to Wisconsin, when done doing that compare the conference RPIs. Wisconsin didnt deserve #2 seed over Duke. Having said all that I'm a Duke alum, but I think its UCLA over Duke in the Elite 8.

I seemed to have gotten a few bites on my UNC/Tennessee comments. I don't disagree with comments about the strength Kansas or the fact of Tennessee winning by many narrow margins. One fact I'm sure most anyone will agree on is that this year's tournament is LOADED. When it comes down to making picks amoung so many powerful teams, you have to apply one of the least talked about attributes, which is intangeables. If anyone out there doesn't realize how powerful an intangiable Bruce Pearl is, you might need to step back and adjust your brackets.

That is an impressive list of Tennessee victories (12 wins over NCAA tourney teams). Apparently none of the regular season matters if you lose in the semi-finals of your conference tournament.

The vols haven't looked that great since beating Memphis. Loss at Vandy...close half with South Carolina before blowout and then a tight tourney game with that same South Carolina team, and then a loss. That is far from impressive.