Lets take a look at the numbers, shall we?

[NavinRJohnson]

First off, this assumes a healthy Jerel McNeal for the tournament. Without him, I have a hard time disagreeing with the committee too much, although I reserve the right to bitch about the geographic placement/match-up.

         #7 BC        MU
W/L:    20-11 <  23-9
RPI      32      <   22
SOS      11     >   17
1-50     6-7   =   5-6
L10      5-5   =   5-5
RD/NT   6-7  <  8-5

Committee got it: WRONG


          #7 IU     MU
W/L:    20-10 <  23-9
RPI         28   <   22
SOS       52   <   17
1-50      5-8  <  5-6
L10        5-5  =  5-5
RD/NT    5-10 <  8-5

Committee got it: VERY WRONG


       #6 Duke      MU
W/L:    22-10  <  23-9
RPI         15    >   22
SOS         3    >   17
1-50        8-7  >  5-6
L10         4-6  <  5-5
RD/NT     7-6  <  8-5

Committee got it: RIGHT


       #6Vandy     MU
W/L:    19-11 <  23-9
RPI         47   <   22
SOS        23   <   17
1-50       5-5  >  5-6
L10        5-5  =  5-5
RD/NT     5-8  <  8-5

Committee got it: WRONG


      #5 VaTech     MU
W/L:    20-11   <  23-9
RPI         34     <   22
SOS        22     <   17
1-50       6-4    >  5-6
L10         5-5   =  5-5
RD/NT     8-9   <  8-5

Committee got it: WRONG


        #5 USC      MU
W/L:    23-11  <  23-9
RPI         40    <   22
SOS        43   <   17
1-50       5-6  =  5-6
L10        5-5  =  5-5
RD/NT     8-8  <  8-5

Committee got it: WRONG


         #5 UT        MU
W/L:    22-10  <   23-9
RPI         12    >   22
SOS         5    >   17
1-50       7-6  >   5-6
L10        7-3   >   5-5
RD/NT    6-10  <   8-5

Committee got it: RIGHT



        #4 UVA       MU
W/L:    19-10  <   23-9
RPI          55   <   22
SOS         49   <   17
1-50        7-4  >  5-6
L10          6-4  >  5-5
RD/NT       3-9 <  8-5

Committee got it: VERY WRONG



       #4 Maryland      MU
W/L:    24-8      >     23-9
RPI         16      >     22
SOS        15      >    17
1-50       8-4     >   5-6
L10         8-2     >   5-5
RD/NT     7-5     <    8-5

Committee got it: RIGHT



So that's 6 teams you could easily argue should be seeded behind us, based on the numbers, which would more than likely put us at the 6 seed most of us were expecting. Which leads me to believe that both Jerel McNeal and the committee liking the look of the first round match-up with MSU were factors.

[RawdogDX]

Great job.  I'll never understand this decision.  How do you have a better record, better rpi and better sos and be seeded 3 spots behind a team.

[WashDCWarrior]

Great job.  I'll never understand this decision.  How do you have a better record, better rpi and better sos and be seeded 3 spots behind a team.

Magic 8 Ball approach.  Will Marquette get hosed?  Signs point to yes.

[AlumKCof93]

I think this is pretty telling.  But at the end of the day, I think we all know MU got screwed out of a better seeding, but at least we got in and have a winnable game against MSU.  UNC will be tough, but what a great win that will be.

[ChicosBailBonds]

Nicely done Naivin


In my opinion, its the NCAAs way of saying they don't like the Big East's size.  They screwed Cincinnati last year and they royally screwed Syracuse this year and many of the conference teams with seeds.

[JetCityWarrior]

The only thing this really points to is that the winner of this first round matchup shouldn't be playing North Carolina the very next game.  I think Marquette is a legitimate 7 seed, and MSU is probably actually a 10 seed.  They still meet, because the committee thinks that it's good drama (which it is).  But they would still have to go through Georgetown the very next game.  Thus, it's obvious that the committee moved this matchup to an 8 vs. 9 so that the potential for a 2nd round interconference matchup could be avoided.

[NYWarrior]

In my opinion, its the NCAAs way of saying they don't like the Big East's size.  They screwed Cincinnati last year and they royally screwed Syracuse this year and many of the conference teams with seeds.

Exactly right.