Texas: The Longhorns looked like a protected seed before the month of February, but the non-conference wins over UCLA, Villanova, and Wisconsin now seem like a long time ago.
This is why I hate NCAA selection theory... So Texas' wins over quality non-con competition early are basically forgotten and shouldn't help them, but KSU's losses to middling non-con competition early are still going to keep KSU out?
I'm getting at the idea that if the committee truly looks at the whole tournament resume, none of this "...seems like a long time ago" crap should come up. Either you look at the whole schedule, or you just go off of conference play, or something.
Just like it kills me that they think Notre Dame still has a good chance of getting in... I realize the Big East is a meatgrinder, but just going up against quality competition and losing shouldn't get you a bid. All the analysts are still thinking back to Nov-Dec when they had to stand in line to slob on 'Godys knob and they think that means they deserve to be in the field after getting housed in conference.
Plus I will never understand why playing a low-RPI team and winning hurts you. Same thing as having a weak conference; it's not School X's fault that everyone else sucks.
