For the third consecutive year, TourneyBubble was able to sit down with the NCAA Tournament Selection Commitee Chairman for a fake interview. You have questions, and 2010-11 Chairman Eugene Smith of Ohio State has answers.
TourneyBubble: Mr. Smith – thank you for joining us today. Let me get right to it – what the hell were you thinking with the 68-team tournament and the First Four?
Eugene Smith: Thanks for having me. Obviously, we wanted to make sure the tournament structure made absolutely no sense. In an effort to squeeze more money out of the new television contract, we decided to add two days worth of games that do not fit into a conventional tournament structure. We intend to over-promote the First Four to the point of pissing off every college basketball fan.
TB: Why do the play-in games include at-large teams and not eight 16-seeds playing to get into the tournament?
ES: We want to make the process unfair for everybody. For example, a 15 seed has to win fewer games to win a national championship as compared to the last four at-large teams. The lower seed, the more difficult it will be to win the tournament – get it?
TB: No.
ES: We have also heard a lot of complaints from the smaller conferences about the Opening Round (TB Editor’s note: that means a play-in game). They feel like they are stuck there every year, so to address their concerns we are going to add two more teams to the Opening Round, to make sure that the conferences that make the least money are stuck in perpetual irrelevancy. From both a small and large conference perspective, the First Four is a lose-lose.
TB: Moving on, what is the Committee going to do to screw Virginia Tech out of a bid this year?
ES: Isn’t it great? We come up with a squirrely, lame excuse to leave Virginia Tech out of the tournament almost every year. The most important thing is to ensure that they have to hit a moving target. Last year we stressed the importance of non-conference scheduling, so after they played one of the toughest non-conference schedules in the country this year we are going to shift to quality non-conference wins against the Top-25. Since that is where Tech falls short this year, we will just go with that. I can’t wait to see Seth Greenberg’s face!
TB: What do you make of the strong performance of mid-major powers thusfar? Old Dominion and Central Florida have an excellent combination of good computer numbers and quality wins already in their pockets.
ES: It’s going to be very, very tough to leave those teams out of the tournament - but we will try our best. Our only hope is that they have a few bad losses in conference play that we can focus on. Because when you come to the question of whether a mid-major team can compete with some of the best teams in the country, you have to focus on their bad losses instead of when they actually beat some of the best teams in the country.
TB: What you just said makes absolutely no sense.
ES: That’s the way we roll. As soon as you have the time to actually verify that the explanations for our decisions are completely bullshit, the First Round will have already begun!
TB: How has Butler’s run to the national championship game changed the NCAA Tournament?
ES: For starters, we have to make sure it never happens again. Our worst nightmare is for a non-BCS team to win it all. Can you imagine how much money we could lose? It was a close call, so we have to redouble our efforts to give strong mid-major teams head-to-head first round matchups, disadvantageous seeds, harrowing travel requirements and undeserved, impossibly hard games to play in the second round. It’s all about preserving the status quo.
TB: That about sums it up. Thanks for joining us, Mr. Smith.
ES: It was great talking to you. If you’ll excuse me, I have to call Jay Bilas and ask his opinion of Central Florida.
