NCAA Tournament 2011: It's Time for a Formula to Determine the 68-Team Field

Houston, we have a problem.

It always seems that the NCAA Tournament has some teams seeded either too high or low, while a team is snubbed in favor of another that may not deserve to be in the field of 68.

To fix this, there needs to be a formula based off of three major components—the polls, RPI and strength of schedule—to  easily determine who are the 37 at-large teams that did not win their conference tournaments and to seed the whole field.

Teams like Utah State, who continue to do well every season, always get penalized from seeds that they deserve because of their conference affiliation.

The Aggies won 30 games and the WAC tournament for the second time in three years, but were given a No. 12 seed despite an RPI of 15 and strength of schedule rank of 120, according to RealTimeRPI.com.

Also, the selection committee’s surprising decision to take UAB over other bubble teams such as Colorado or Virginia Tech was made worse when the Blazers lost their first round game to Clemson on Tuesday, 70-52.

Having a formula that emphasizes both human polls, the RPI and strength of schedule would be much like what the Bowl Championship Series is to college football, but it would ensure that the top teams are seeded properly.

As far as bubble teams are concerned, the final eight at-large teams should be the ones in the First Four for the right to be in the 64-team bracket, or to go to the NIT if they lose. That way, it awards low-rated automatic qualifiers by not having to play an extra game in the tournament while improving the quality of the four first round games.

Hopefully, this will make everyone’s job a lot easier in making and filling out their brackets.