March Madness? How About March Insanity?

Who would have thought that this year's Final Four would be comprised of an eight-seed, an 11-seed (both being mid-majors), and a couple traditional powers not seeded No. 1? If anyone in America got this year's bracket totally correct, I'd like to meet this person, shake his or her hand, and treat them to a steak dinner. Even as a fairly avid college basketball fan, I never saw this coming.

Looking at this year's Final Four from a historical perspective, it's the most topsy-turvy collection of schools ever, since seeding began in 1979. If you simply add the total of the team's seed numbers, it equals 26. The next year with the highest total for seeds was 2000 with 22, followed by 1980 at 21 and 2006 with 20. It's also the first year that a number 1 or 2 seed has not made the Final Four. Unbelievable.

From a statistical perspective, none of these teams had any business coming near the Final Four. For the past couple of years, I have put together my brackets based solely on statistical information. I did pretty good last year, so I figured I'd spice it up a bit this year by adding RPI and Strength of Schedule factors into my ratings. Based on the stats, VCU should never have even gotten to the tournament (USC was my play-in winner), Butler was supposed to be a first round loser to Old Dominion, and both UConn and Kentucky were knocked out in the Sweet 16. Statistically, the Final Four should have been Ohio State, Duke, Kansas, and Florida, with Kansas beating Duke for the title. Stats be damned!

Looking at the Final Four from a competition perspective, maybe it's time to start really taking the so-called "mid-majors" seriously. I know, ever since Gonzaga started making reservations for March Madness the previous April, people have been saying that mid-majors should be treated with a little more respect and fear than they were previously given, and not many really took that seriously until George Mason made the Final Four a few years ago, but looking at what's gone on the past couple of years is cause for thought. Who would have ever thought that Butler would be back in the Final Four and possibly their second-straight title game? And what about VCU? They're only the third 11th seed to make the Final Four (along with George Mason and LSU). Maybe this is an indication that mid-majors might deserve higher seeding, or at least not be relegated to a ridiculous play-in game.

Which leads me to another point — why is the NCAA designating its play-in games for any seed higher than 16? It seems odd to me that a team not invited to the main tournament has to play-in for an 11 or 12 seed. Shouldn't all teams on the outside looking in be playing for a lowly 16 seed? Maybe they should start making the top seeds play an extra game — "if you think you deserve to be No. 1, you're gonna have to work extra hard to win the championship!"

Which leads me to yet another point: I know the NCAA just expanded the tournament by another four teams to even out the number of play-in games (it also baffles me that they put two of those games in the same bracket — huh?), but maybe it's time to go all-out and create a "Hoosiers"-style tournament that involves just about every team on the planet.

And why not? There are so many postseason tournaments now that it's starting to resemble the football bowl season. I had no idea that a fourth tournament had been added this year, the CollegeInsiders.com Tournament, or CIT, until a couple weeks ago. Seriously? You're telling me that the NCAA and NIT committees snub enough "worthy" teams that we have to create a third, and now a fourth, postseason tournament? I'm not buying it.

But if that is the case, why not make the NCAA tournament a 128-team tournament, throw them all in to a hat, and pick them out one by one, and then say, "Okay, boys, have at it. The last one standing is the champ." Who's to say that one of the NIT's Final Four teams wouldn't be in the hunt for the title? After all, they're the ones complaining the most that they didn't get their shot at it, right? Let's get rid of all the "bubble" controversy and make it the biggest tournament in the world.

Okay, so maybe that's not practical. But the point I'm trying to make is that, just as in some of the BCS controversy during football season, maybe the mid-majors need a little more respect than what they're getting. Should more of them be allowed into the NCAA tournament? I don't know. Just like Boise State and TCU are beginning to change perceptions of the so-called "non-BCS" schools in football, maybe teams like Butler and VCU can start to change the perceptions of the smaller schools in basketball. The great thing, though, is that one of them is guaranteed a spot in the title game. And if one of the should win it, not only will it bring some much-needed credibility to mid-major schools, but it will cement this year's tournament as being one of the most insane in history.