I'm not going to get all bent out of shape about it. You still have to win the game in front of you. It's a good opportunity to prove the selection committee wrong, or they can prove that the committee knew more than the pollsters do.
You have a link to those rankings? I don't even see this weeks rankings posted on espn's site right now.
Just win baby. Stop all the ******* complaining and like Third said, win the game in front of you because that is all that matters. If we're not good enough to win it all then so be it. Stop complaining who has the more difficult or easy road, we put ourselves in this situation by ******* it up in the end.
This is why so much of the talk about how far coaches tend to advance in the tournament is essentially worthless. Let's say Texas doesn't make the Sweet 16 this year - is it a failure or a black mark to get beat by a team that lost in the Pac 10 tournament finals in overtime? (Obviously it's a disappointment if it happens.) Does that make us less successful in the tournament than a team that may not have to play a top 40 program to get into the Sweet 16? To me the only relevant metric is to compare Final Four appearances. Even that can be a little dicey, but you're always going to have to beat at least one strong team to get there.
Complain and moan all you want about the seeding if Texas makes it to the Elite 8, but the committee felt they are a Sweet 16 team at best. Bitching about it now will look pretty silly if we tank in the tournament. And if we tank, using the excuse that we had a harder road is pretty lame. Beat Duke and get to the Elite 8, then you have earned the "we were disrespected" card. Until then, just go out and win.
Some of the seedings stem from rules that are in place that require a certain balance in the brackets (they score them and each bracket must be within 5 points of the others) and practices that keep teams with high rankings from being on the same side in the same bracket as others from their conference, etc. Once you stop being considered a top squad you become potential prey to the many balancing acts that occur when seedings and placements are concocted. Texas was a victim of that process this year. You think Duke is happy about it?
Yeah, it could have been that both were threes and each got moved, one up, one down. But it's still hard to understand. www.usatoday.com/sports/college/mensbasketball/usatpoll.htm
It's a tornament. If you somehow avoided a better seeded team then it means you were a better team (since they lost or you would have to play them anyway). You were going to have to play them anyway and the team didn't deserve a much better path. If you beat a higher seeded team it is even better, but at the end of the day the only gripe about bracketology is that you got worn down by teams you were supposed to beat and shouldn't have had to face faced the wearing down from. Go play the game. You still have to win against the best to be considered the best.
