Scott: Bowlsby is an idiot. I believe his quote was that the Iowa player sent to the showers for rape was a "student athlete first and basketball player second." Jeez, there are still guys espousing that? Also, re: the Gottlieb issue, it was a huge conflict of interest and the BigTen really showed their cluelessness by issuing that presser saying to the extent they were in the right and 'how dare you question us Doug Gottlieb', etc. Jim Delaney clearly doesn't understand what the appearance of conflict of interest is. It is the APPERANCE, it doesn't mean the ref purposely made bad calls, I'm sure, and most people watching the game figured, he didn't. The point was that it was a really horrendous spot to put the ref in. People with agendas could use it to......(Notre Dame anyone?).

Anyway, good stuff.

Agreed on UNC, they aren't going to win it. The sure sign is that everyone at ESPN-head-dom is picking them.

My special, watch UW go out in the second round to Pitt.

I agreed with Gottlieb on this issue. Hartzell shouldn't be refereeing any games past January, if he refs at all. Also, Hartzell was calling the Memphis/Louisville Conf USA game and was involved in two late calls that impacted the game. (fortunately, they only one of them went against Memphis)

Bowlsby didn't handle the Pierce thing well, but it was a really tough spot, if you know the whole story. As a Iowa grad, I know some of the behind the scene stuff and the first case had some Kobe-like inconsistencies.
Pierce committed another act like it two years later, which makes everyone involved in supporting him sick. I hope he gets the book thrown at him.

Not a fan of Alford, so I have mixed feelings about the team going to the tourney, as I was dreaming of UWM's Bruce Pearl coming back to Iowa. Not gonna happen now.

Wisconsin beat Pitt last year in a great tourney game, which was basically a home game for the Badgers, considering they were in Milwaukee. Sets up to a be another bruising game.

Scott: I meant UWash.

Re: Pierce, I bet the behind the scenes stuff was ugly, unfortunately Bowelsby's comments say to me he's still in his glass/NCAA/student-athlete/house. Egads. Having said all that, Ferentz was an awesome pick. How long can he gravy-train that though?

I think both Iowa and N. Iowa are properly in the tourney. What I find more controversial are the seedings -- Pacific, GW, and Vermont are outrageously low at 9, 12 and 13 respectively. Those teams had much better seasons than any team left off the "bubble", yet they are seeded lower or comparable to UCLA (11) and Iowa (10). I'd much rather focus less on the sub-.500 conference teams that "didn't get in" and that folks talk about the Committee giving mid-major teams with stellar regular seasons virtually no chance to make some noise.

One idea would be to eliminate conference champions from the "play-in" game. That way, we could have Iowa and Notre Dame decide the issue on the court, rather than penalize and embarass Oakland and Alabama A&M. Another more radical idea would be to have a rule that no conference champion could be seeded lower than 12. That would assure that the 1-4 seeds play a meaningful game against "bubble" teams in the first round (which would drive up ratings considerably) and also give GW (who has to face Ga Tech), Vermont (Syracuse), and Old Dominion (MSU) a shot.

I like Old Dominion over Michigan State for the requisite 5-12 upset. I also agree with TFD that Pitt will beat Washington, and I will speculate that Pittsburgh will have a tougher time with Pacific than it will with the Huskies!

I see the final 8 being Illinois, Arizona, Georgia Tech, Wake, UNC, UConn, Syracuse and Oklahoma -- with Illinois, Wake, UNC and Syracuse in the final 4. Illinois to win, a pick I have to make as I am an alum and I get so precious few opportunities to write their name into the final bracket.

What no Penn?!?

backward K
I like your radical thoughts on the tourney, but it will never happen. The tourney is the BCS with a better format. It's not about fairness, or seeding, it's about money. It's about giving the top conferences who control the NCAA (without the top conferences there would be no NCAA, there would be some other organization made up of the top conferences) the most money.
Money is paid out to the schools based on how many games they play in the tourney. So it is in the schools best interest to get as high a seed as possible and play weak schools to advance and get more money.
While they say that the number of teams from a conference doesn't come into consideration, that just means they don't mention it explicitly. Just like they don't allow Bowlsby in the room when discussing Iowa. They have the appearance of propriety, but remember, in the end, it is all about the money.

don't be surprised if St Mary's makes the sweet 16...

I look for Florida to beat either Louisville or Ganzaga in the final.

Wisconsin lost to Pitt in that game in Milwaukee.

Pitt will lose in the first round if the refs call it tight like they tend to do. Pitt is utterly reliant on the ability to bully their opponents this year. Without it, they lack the defensive ability of years past.

So you want to make it easier for a mediocre team, like Oakland, to advance in the NCAA tournament than a team like Illinois.

The NCAA tournament is set up and seeded so the better teams have an advantage. Why should the Southland or Big South champ have a better shot at advancing than the fifth place team in the Pac-10.

Which is what Arizona was when it won the championship in 1997. (Or were they fourth?)

First of all, I'm a huge Utah State fan. Spencer Nelson might be the best player in the country no one's ever heard of; check out his career stats and achievements when you get a chance. They have fantastic shooters--best team field goal % in the nation--and great passers. I love the way they run their offense, too; everyone sets picks for everyone else. It was remarkable how easily they created open shots against Pacific.

Unfortunately, they got a raw deal with Arizona in the first round. They're probably one-and-done, but I could honestly see them making the Sweet 16.

Second, for the stat geeks out there, Sean Forman, who should be deified for creating Baseball-Reference.com, ran a Monte Carlo simulation on the tourney using the Sagarin predictor ratings. This is the most likely bracket:

http://www.sju.edu/~sforman/research/talks/NCAA2005/mybracket.txt

Too many of you are sleeping on Washington. They will at least make the Elite Eight, and probably the Final Four. The Huskies are for real. They beat Alabama, Utah, Oklahoma, and NC State in non-conference. They're plenty battle tested and will be able to hang with anybody's physical play. And don't be surprised if Pitt doesn't even make it out of the first round.

My Final Four
UConn
Oklahoma
Washington
Illinois

Illinios should win it all.

Troy, I would be shocked if an ACC team did not make the final four. Well, maybe that's too strong a word, but Duke, Carolina and Wake are easily the most impressive trio going right now from any one conference.

UConn is peaking at the right time as always, but I think UNC has too much firepower for them (discount their earlier game as I believe both UNC and UConn were missing their leading scorers). What will get UNC is a lack of half court defense, if anything does.

UConn will barely survive NC State in the second round if NCSU gets that far. Or they may not survive them at all. State has played on even footing with the ACC's big 3 over the last 3 weeks (1-3 vs. Duke, Wake and UNC, all 4 tight contests).

I still like UNC for the final four but not to win it all. How can you pick against Illinois? From what I've seen, no way Washington wins 4 straight, they won't be in the final four.

I like UNC and Illinois. I think Wake and GaTech have a path paved in gold to have an ACC rep from Alb. The Duke region, I think is a crapshoot there - 4-5 teams can win that one.

Arizona was 5th in the Pac 10 in 1997. They were a fourth seed in the tournament.

As an Illinois grad, it makes me nervous to see so many people picking them.

As a season ticket holder for the Washington Huskies I can tell you that despite their size they are able to play against teams with big guys.

UW beat Utah early in the year without Brandon Roy who is arguably the best pro-prospect on the team.

The Huskies were 5-1 against Arizona State and Arizona. Diagu,the Pac-10 player of the year, and Channing Fry are two of the top big guys in the nation and neither led to their team prevailing in the long-haul.

The reason the UW is able to offset the new style of dominant big-man is that their guards are lightning quick and allow the Huskies to crash the boards unlike any other team I've seen in a long while. It's very difficult to explain just how valuable it is to be able to send 4 or 5 guys in for an offensive rebound because you know they are quick enough to get back and D up after crashing the boards.

Give the Huskies a chance, if Larry Bird thinks they can do it you should too.

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/03/15/sports/ncaabasketball/15huskies.html

Don't count out Gonzaga. I'm a student, so I'm a bit biased, but I think they have a chance at the Final Four.

First of all, Adam Morrison has been improving greatly throughout the season. Against USD in the tourney, he had 25. Against St. Mary's he had 30. Derek Ravio is hitting 3s really well now, and has been since Illinois. J.P. Batista is finally fitting in with the team's offence, and he's as good, offensively, as Ronny Turiaf. And Ronny Turiaf is just plain awesome, he rebounds extremely well, and in among the leaders in blocked shots.

Errol Knight has not been shooting well, but he still defends really well, and his broken thumb which he as been dealing with all season is improving. We have Sean Mallon off the bench as an extra forward, and David Pendergraft as an extra F/G, so if Ronny or Batista get into foul trouble we're not dead.

We've beat Washington, a potential Final Four. We've beat Georgia Tech, who alot of people are touting as sleepers. We beat Oak St. at their home, and they're a potential final four team. Sure, we got creamed by Illinois, but (almost) everyone did, and if they get knocked out before the Final Four, then we're good.

I also like St. Mary's. They could be a Sweet Sixteen. When they're good, they're good. And they're usually good. They just needed better teams to play.

#13 Blah Blah Blah
I agree that it will be an (epic) upset if the ACC doesn't place somebody in the Final Four. It will also be an upset if any of us actually pick all four teams right. I just picked the four teams that I think have the best shots in their regions. I think this is by far the hardest year to forecast that I can remember.

UNC SHOULD be in the championship game. They are incredibly talented at every position. When Marvin Williams is on your bench, you know you're special. Still, they haven't shown me much of a killer instinct this year, played very poorly down the stretch, and have the albatross that is Roy Williams's tourney history (an otherwise great coach) around their neck. UConn's just playing better right now, but it wouldn't shock me if they get knocked out early. NC State is a great sleeper pick, if they can get by UConn they could do serious damage. That bracket is seriously overrated (just like Kansas), but still hard to pick from.

Oklahoma was just a wild guess. They're not very good, but their bracket is wide open, as you noted. I'm a big Duke fan, but can't force myself to believe they have what it takes this year. Their defense has been spectacular, and K's gotten it done so far, but I just can't see where the points are going to come from. Oklahoma almost beat them earlier in the year, and I just have a feeling they'll get them on the second go round. Perhaps I'm just being pessimistic.

The Albuquerque bracket is the hardest to call of them all. I've seen "experts" pick Wake, Gonzaga, Lousiville, G Tech and even George Washington to come out of the West, and other than GW, I think you can make a good case for any of those choices. I'm taking Washington because they've proven it against more top teams than anybody else, they have depth, they'll have a semi home court advantage against everyone except GU, and they're just clutch. They've pulled out game after game down the stretch this year, and I think they'll continue to do so. They're for real.