[Cracked Sidewalks] Early Look at the 2012-13 Schedule

[The Equalizer]

The people setting the seedings vehemently disagree with you, but what does it matter what they think?

From the article:

When CBS talked to the selection committee chair, Jeff Hathaway, after the brackets were announced, they brought up the case of Missouri. The Tigers, Big 12 champions, got a 2 seed, as was expected. However, they had such a good year (30-4 overall, Big 12 tournament champions, 14-4 in-league during the regular season, undefeated out of conference) that some wondered whether they might sneak up and grab a 1 seed.

Hathaway revealed, though, that Missouri was closer to a three seed than 1 – he said the committee ranked them eighth. The reason: non-conference strength of schedule, which was considered weak enough that the RPI put their overall strength of schedule rating at 86th in the country, the lowest of any of this year's No. 1 or No. 2 seeds by a fairly wide margin.

http://www.sportsgrid.com/ncaa-basketball/ncaa-tournament-2012-selection-controversy/

Hathaway's statement this seems to confirm what I've been saying all along.

"Missouri was closer to a 3 seed than a 1".  
He did not say--as Brew has been trying to spin-- "They would have been #1 seed except we downgraded them because of their SOS"

There's no way to interpret his curious phrasing other than Missouri was always considered as a 2. And if SOS were actually a factor, maybe they actually would have been a 3  

But this next part is equally imporant:  THEY WEREN'T!!!!    

And then the committee proceeded to place them in the closest venue to campus in the region with the weakest #1 seed.  

Some punishment.

[cheebs09]

Based on the show after the Selection Show, I thought Hathaway pretty much said that. He said they put a lot of weight on non-conference strength of schedule when asked about the Missouri case. To me that seems that they would have been much closer to a 1-seed with a better non-conference schedule. I don't think Missouri was a certain one seed going into the selection show. They were mostly thought of as the top 2 seed or last 1 seed. When pressed on the reasoning, it really seemed like they were down-graded due to their non-conference schedule.

[brewcity77]

We can expect Marquette84, er... Equalizer to now produce 500 words about how the person in the room who made the decision actually factored things the opposite of what he said publicly.

That's why it's pointless trying to say something to 84. Seems like all the other posters on the site disagree with him, the track record of the SC the past two years disagrees with him, and the chairman of the SC disagrees with him. Yet somehow, he's the ONLY person in the whole entire world who knows how the committee really works, and somehow the RPI difference of playing a top-150 team and sub-300 team, as well as the SOS implications, have absolutely nothing to do with seeding.

[Lennys Tap]

 SJS/84/Equalizer will massage, twist and fabricate facts to fit his argument and cares nothing about truth. Before Hoop came along he was Pancho to Chico's Cisco. Enough said.