Agree with @upstater
. It's not UConn's seed ( which is low) or our draw ( which looks good) it's the fact that the AAC was screwed with teams not getting in, teams getting bad seeds and the worst is that they are putting the 3 of us in the same region.
It's blatant at this point. Open your eyes.
I'm all in with UConn forever, but if this section process didn't scare the hell out ofyou going forward you're missing the Big picture.
But the committee is always changing and what they do one year under ACC leadership may not inform future brackets.
They clearly vaulted NC State into the tournament. SMU's complaints are only so strong - they really are a marginal candidate.
Having 3 schools in one bracket isn't ideal - but at least it's not stacked like the Midwest. It might put a ceiling on credits - but come on - it's pretty unlikely that Memphis goes on some long run. If the teams in the East win and play each other it guarantees you get someone to the next round. If all three won two games in different regions they could all bow out in the round of 16.
UConn was underseeded but who would trade for one of the draws the 5s got? Memphis and Cincy are pretty fairly seeded.
Why would the ACC screw Louisville? They should be higher than a 4 - but the seeding is based on resume and they don't have a 1 or 2 seed resume. Currently they are playing as well as anyone, but that isn't the only criteria.
Every study will show you that who you play and how far you play from your campus is more important than your seed. Buffalo and NYC is ideal for UConn. Would you prefer a 5 or 6 in the south, a tougher road and lose the opportunity to be at the Garden to have only 2 teams in the East? Of course not.
Nothing has changed. The dregs of the AAC are going to be anchors, this has been obvious since day 1.