COMMENTARY

By Mike DeCourcy

updated 10:59 p.m. ET March 14, 2005

It only takes the slightest amount of Googling to conjure up the names of the gentlemen comprising the NCAA Division I men's basketball committee, which most of us refer to as the "selection committee" because it requires three fewer words and 19 fewer letters.

But those displeased with the committee's work this season don't need names and addresses. They need only a mirror. Nobody got shafted, really. There's a relatively reasonable explanation for just about every seeding and every selection.

Those who didn't make it have only themselves to blame.

Those who didn't like their seeds had the power to make them better.

Just take a quick tour through the names that quickly jump forward as being noteworthy exclusions. Look at the teams whose seeds appear to be most out of line with their perceived value. It's hard to pick a fight with the committee's work.

Seedings
Louisville, No. 4 in Albuquerque region: The Cardinals gained the championships of Conference USA's regular season and tournament. Some thought that might be good enough for a No. 1 seed. Instead, they're here. Why? Scheduling. Other than the trip to Maui, the Cardinals' only strong non-league opponents were Florida and Kentucky. If the Cards had swept those games, they might have been a No. 2 seed. Duke's schedule was weaker than Louisville's, but the Devils knew they had the luxury of two league games each against Carolina and Wake. Conference USA never figured to be that strong.

Syracuse, No. 4 in Austin region: The Orange played in the Coaches vs. Cancer Classic, but otherwise piled up another collection of Colgates and Bonaventures. They've proven their seed is of little consequence to their tournament performance, but playing at least a few more majors might have put them in better position to challenge.

COLLEGE BASKETBALL Updated brackets: Men’s | Women’s   Give us your NCAA Tournament thoughts

Pittsburgh, No. 9 in the Albuquerque region: This is the fourth consecutive season in which the Panthers scheduled themselves into seeding purgatory. The first year, they had an excuse. They still were building. But their rosters the past three years have been powerful. Their opponents have not. Pitt certainly compares favorably to such No. 6 seeds as LSU and Texas Tech. How they climbed so high is hard to figure. But Pitt was good enough to earn four Top 25 victories; it should have been able to collect more than four against the rest of the top 100.

Wake Forest, No. 2 in Albuquerque region: Chris Paul's suspension for throwing a quick punch at NC State's Julius Hodge was not without consequences. It cost the Deacons a shot at the ACC tournament title. And that has cost them a No. 1 seed. Wake had a stronger overall case for a No. 1 than Duke, both in non-league and regular-season conference play. It's apparent the committee did not want to appear to be condoning what happened in that NC State game.

It was nice to hear committee chair Bob Bowlsby lamenting the committee's inability to get many teams placed closed to home for their first-round games. That means there won't be any repeat of last year's absurdity, when a No. 6 Wisconsin team got to travel an hour down the road to Milwaukee and No. 11 Air Force had to go only slightly farther, to Denver.

MORE FROM COLLEGE BASKETBALL

College basketball Section Front

Scramble already underway for big Dance Wall, Patterson lead No. 4 Kentucky by Rider No. 9 Duke matches school record with 18 treys in rout No. 17 OU falls flat in Capel's return to VCU No caffeine needed by Memphis' energetic Pastner Men’s Top 25 preview, analysis, stats, more Elite scorers, sleeper teams, top conferences, more   Slideshow: College hoops All-American teams SCORES, SCHEDULES, STANDINGS, STATS Odds   College basketball Section Front   Add College basketball headlines to your news reader: