Bracketeering: Review of The 2010 NCAA Tourney Selection
Now that the tournament committee has finished their selection and Seth Davis is aroused over Duke's fairly easy road to the Final Four I offer my observations on the final 65.
- Mississippi State should have gotten in over Florida. The Bulldogs came within a whisker of making this issue a moot point but won the SEC West(which admittedly is like being Farmer Ted in Sixteen Candles). They also played better in the last ten games than the Gators and beat them in the SEC tourney.
- Kansas and Kentucky have the toughest roads to the Final Four despite being the top two seeds. Kentucky may have to face Texas in the second round, who have about as much talent as Kentucky but no concept of team play. After that the Wildcats could face either Temple or Wisconsin who give coaches ulcers with their style of play.
- Gonzaga deserved better than an eight seed. They played a fairly tough non-conference schedule and St. Mary's was bound to beat them at least once this millennium. Richmond and Temple also deserved better seeds, though I think the committee saw the Atlantic 10's bubble teams fall off like lemmings and seeded the Spiders and Owls accordingly.
- Everybody heads to the 5-12 matchups, picks the 12s and dances badly while thinking they're geniuses when the 12s win (even though the 12s usually do). This year such "genius" will likely be rewarded with laughter. UTEP has a great chance at beating Butler but Utah State always comes close without actually winning. Cornell would have had a chance against Michigan State or Texas A&M but Temple can force them into a game they don't want to play. New Mexico State has as much chance of beating the Spartans as former Aggie coach Lou Henson does of being nominated for "Best Hair EVER".
What is the duplicate article?
Why is this article offensive?
Where is this article plagiarized from?
Why is this article poorly edited?