As you heard here two days ago...Our Boilers are a 6. I can't stand Xavier, so I like the possibility of playing them second round. Baylor's tough, so it's no gimme, but I think Purdue got what it deserved (unlike many teams) the way they finished the season. Hopefully, they'll find new life in the dance.
Hey tourney committee- is it tough to make picks with the Pac-10's genitalia in your face? Unreal- both Oregon & 'Zona in despite 13 & 14 losses? Garbage. Also, I find Kentucky getting in based on their name complete bubkiss.
Butler got hosed like nobody who's in the dance...and IU's seed shows how closely the committee was watching IU's games after Sampson's departure.
All-in-all, the committee...chose poorly.
Flawed Thinking Atop Flawed Thinking
So, The WCC sends three teams (St. Mary's & Gonzaga at-large & San Diego was the con. champ). The Big Ten gets four teams. Can that committee honestly tell me that Minnesota & aOSU couldn't win that conference OR that the Zags or St. Mary's would finish fifth in the Big Ten?
Arizona gets in based on the fact that, when healthy, they're a much better team than they played for parts of it. That said, they have THIRTEEN losses. We're told each year that the body of work is important...This team's resume as a whole simply isn't worthy of a tournament bid.
The committee said both 'Zona and Oregon got in because of their out-of-conference strength. But, that wasn't important for Kentucky. Losses to Gardner-Webb, UAB & Houston are seemingly ignored simply because the 'Cats had to delay their SEC tourney game until Saturday morning last weekend. Plus, the Committee must have a soft spot in their hearts for the fact that UK has a 17-straight tourney streak going...Congrats Kentucky fans, you stole your way into the record books.