Does the ACC have a member of the committee this year?
It looks to me like Dan Guerrero, UCLA AD who is on the committe, was able to stack the deck for the Bruins. Rather than Wisconsin he has Duke as the 2 seed and makes Duke travel to Arizona (if we get that far) to play in the 1/2 game (again if it gets that far).
UNC gets the toughest bracket. Probably the strongest 2 seed in Tennessee.
No, there is no ACC representative on the committee this year.
But I don't buy the idea that the committee stacked the deck against UNC and gave UCLAan easy path.
You suggest that Wisconsin would have been a tougher 2 than Duke -- were you in Cameron on November 27, when Duke beat Wisconsin by 24? That was just a week or so before Wisconsin won at Texas, so it's not like they were just figuring things out. Duke finished with a higher RPI and a much better profile -- a strong second in the nation's best conference is a much better resume than first in the weaknest of the six BCS conferences.
As for Duke having to travel to Phoenix -- what's biased about that? The committee let UNC play in Charlotte -- they earned it by earning the top seed in the East. UCLA earned a geographic advantage by dominating the West. The deserve the geographic edge in the West title game.
The only time you should complain about geographic placement is when you have to play a worse seed in a situation that's to their advantage -- Gonzaga can complain (playing Davidson in Raleigh); Butler can complain (playing South Alabama in Birmingham); No. 1 Memphis can complain (possibly playing No. 2 Texas in Houston).
I don't see where the committee did UCLA any favors. Granted, I'd rather play BYU in the second round than Indiana (although Indiana does seem to be melting down), but is Notre Dame (which has struggled away from home)/Washington State (a smart, but not veryphysically gifted team) any tougher in the third round than Drake (the best-shooting team in the tournament)/UConn (the most physically gifted team)?
Duke-Tennessee on a neutral court? I'd like to see that -- I don't concede at all that we are inferior to the Vols.
Now a year ago, when Guerrero got No. 2 seed UCLA a game against No. 1 Kansas in Los Angeles -- THAT was one I would scream about. Not this year.
UNC doesn't have to leave the state of NC. And the Tar Heel fans will show up and give a home court advantage. Therefore, it balances out. UNC has the homecourt advantage. UCLA has the easiest bracket.
No, Tennessee is not the toughest 2 seed. They are the 2 seed with the best RPI numbers. There's a difference, and I'm already tired of seeing people say that UNC has the toughest path. It's subjective, but to me, they have a cakewalk. I'll add more thoughts on this later (and admittedly, UNC is a great team, which makes it tough for there to be teams that matchup well with them).
But why would UNC be afraid of Tennessee? Stick Ginyard on Lofton, who is pretty much just a jumpshooter and someone Ginyard should be able to shut down, and then pound them inside with Hansbrough. Tennessee doesn't defend very well and plays right into UNC's pace. Texas, another 2 seed, dropkicked Tennessee by 20 earlier in the season and is just a better team, imo. Georgetown is a better team than Tennessee as well.
With Danny Green's ability to play the 4 effectively, UNC can matchup well with small perimeter-oriented teams. If I were a UNC fan, I LOVE that Tennessee is my 2 seed. UNC beats them 9 out of 10.
If UNC and Tennessee end up playing in Charlotte, it will not be as big of a home court advantage for UNC. Knoxville is only a 4 hour drive from Charlotte, so there would probably be plenty of orange wearing fans in Bobcats Arena.
The Sweet Sixteen sites were chosen years ago. I am sure that the UCLA tried but failed to have the West Regional moved to Pauley Pavilion (just kidding).
The game sites for UCLA and UNC were really no brainers.
Wisconsin won its last 10 games. Duke was 6-4. Duke was playing better in December than they are today. Wisconsin is ranked 5th, Duke 9th. Wisconsin is a 3 seed and Duke a 2.
My point is that I think that UCLA got a good deal from the Committee and having their AD on the Committee helped. UNC got no favors from a Committee without an ACC rep.
For opening weekend games, the NCAA allotment is tiny.
Yes, tiny. Something like 550 tickets per team is all for Omaha. I assume other sites are similar.
The state of North Carolina loves them some Heels. The vast, vast majority of non-allotted ticket-holders will be North Carolina residents. They will be rooting for the Heels. The best Tennessee (or any regional final opponent) can hope for is to do a full court press on the fans from the two losing teams in the Sweet 16. But they'll still be dramatically underrepresented.
Just be you. You is enough. - K, 4/5/10, 0:13.8 to play, 60-59 Duke.
You're all jealous hypocrites. - Titus on Laettner
You see those guys? Animals. They're animals. - SIU Coach Chris Lowery, on Duke
Every season, there are people on every message board across the country complaining about how so-and-so got a cakewalk while their team got stuck in the toughest region. I never know whether to laugh or get angry.
NOBODY has a cakewalk. Everybody's path to the final four is treacherous. If you don't believe me, ask uconn fans, who saw north carolina go down in their region a couple of years ago and must have been licking their chops at the prospect of playing George Mason! There are no series in the ncaa, it's one and done. And, with the possible exception of the first round for higher seeds, you are facing an opponent that is fully capable of beating you every single time to step on the floor.
This handwringing about somebody getting it easy and someone else getting it tough is silly.
Having attended the games in Charlotte this weekend, I forgot just how much UNC is the home team throughout the state.
UNC, effectively, will be playing home games in Charlotte, and that is an advantage, though, as the Hokies proved this weekend (and MD and Duke proved earlier this year), UNC is not a juggernaut incapable of being beaten at home.
As an aside, I am sooooo glad Duke didn't "earn" the right to play in Charlotte. The anti-Duke sentiment is just as strong as the pro-UNC sentitment. Amazingly, the UNC fans who surrounded us cheered louder against Duke than they did for UNC. It truly is an odd phenomenon. I think it results from the fact that they can have mixed emotions about their team (Stephenson is playing terrible!), but that their hatred for Duke runs pure and cold.
I'm not sure there could be a more hostile environment for Duke than Charlotte.
"Just like you man. I got the shotgun, you got the briefcase." Omar Little
"As an aside, I am sooooo glad Duke didn't "earn" the right to play in Charlotte. The anti-Duke sentiment is just as strong as the pro-UNC sentitment. Amazingly, the UNC fans who surrounded us cheered louder against Duke than they did for UNC. It truly is an odd phenomenon. I think it results from the fact that they can have mixed emotions about their team (Stephenson is playing terrible!), but that their hatred for Duke runs pure and cold."
I agree about the cheering--I was amazed at the fans who just mildly cheered for UNC--there were times they cheered, but it was sporadic, but once Duke was playing they booed so much harder. It actually was a little sad--to watch people more concerned about who to pull against than who to pull for.