NCAA Bracket 2011: Are Selection and Seeding Unbiased?

Michael CampanellaContributor IMarch 15, 2011

Madness Begins with the Committee
Madness Begins with the Committee

It's always an exciting week of events, leading to yet another fantastic finish of a weekend in Conference Tournament action.

From the Princeton/Washington buzzer beaters to the history-making U Conn five day-five game winning stretch to the San Diego St/Kentucky championship beat downs—every game, shot and dribble of the basketball determining the postseason fates of these athletically gifted young men.

As hopes and dreams are elevated or deflated based upon the success of a single shot or the inability to close out their opponent.

The goal?

A chance to play in the Big Dance.

A chance to put your name in the hat with the best of the best and actually have a playoff to decide on the court, who is the No. 1 team in the country.

Some earned that right, others fell in backwards while yet some hopes were dashed by a 10 member committee where "everyone in the room has a different emphasis on different criteria. So when we go to vote, everyone selects the criteria they think is important to them and they ultimately vote."

Says Gene Smith tourney committee president.

What?! Are you kidding me?!

This isn't the Oscars, where voting is subjective; it's not a restaurant review, where everyone's taste is different.

It's essentially black and white numbers, right in front you on the infamous blind resume, loaded up with statistical information of wins, losses, strength of schedules, road games, conference games, RPI index ratings.

It really is not that difficult.

Sure, when you get to the bottom of the 68 teams there might be a team or two that can be switched. That argument will never cease, even when there are 96 teams to choose from.

But get this: 13 teams with at least 11 losses, most since 1985; seven teams with at least 13 losses, never been more than three; and five teams with at least 14 losses and there was a total of SIX in the last 25 years.

What I find more appalling though is the seeding throughout the selected teams—by far the worst job I've ever seen! 

Teams like a Kansas St. and Vanderbilt, who had mediocre seasons at best, wind up at No. 5 seeds. 

The Wildcats lost three times to Colorado and the Buffaloes are not even in!

The Commodore's have an RPI ranking of 27 and in mid-20's in the polls, losing four of the last seven games, yet seeded as a TOP 20 team.

Then the Huskies of Connecticut that finished ninth in their conference, string together five consecutive wins, take the Big East crown and are rewarded with a No. 3 seed, meaning TOP 12 in the country.

The Kentucky Wildcats follow a similar pattern by winning the SEC title, yet are dropped to a No. 4 seed and the team they beat in Florida are rewarded a higher No. 2 seed.

The list seemingly goes on and on, but the MOST egregious of all was Utah St. being ranked in the TOP 20 for quite a stretch and win their conference tournament with a record of 30-3 and are seeded No. 12?!

That's an absolute joke! 

That means had they lost that last game, they wouldn't even be IN the NCAA Tournament.

Just sickening, as were the players when we saw their faces when announced on CBS late Sunday afternoon.

Oh and by the way, Clemson has ZERO wins against the TOP 50 teams and they're dancing.