Full Disclosure

I fail again.
Out of 53 brackets this year over at the Bracket Matrix, I finished (according to the Parrish Rubric) 49th - ahead of James Worthy, Jim Colton, RPI Forecast, and Sports Projections.

Here's my Breakdown:
Teams Correct: 63
I missed Kentucky and St. Joe's (my 1st and 3rd teams out). I had in Arizona St. and Ohio St.

I was personally shocked that Arizona St. missed, but I suppose it was to be expected with their weak non-conference schedule and whatnot. However, I've heard a rumor that their RPI of 82 was the factor that kept them out. If so, then obviously the committee sees the actual RPI - something that I had been told was false. Furthermore, this would indicate that this committee took a big look at the RPI numbers - something that I would disagree with.

No complaints on Kentucky over Ohio St. - I was thinking about switching this, but I belived that the fact the Kentucky lost to Georgia in the SEC tourney would be enough keep them out. I suppose that this is a situation where I should have looked harder at the RPI.

Seeds Correct: 31
I got 11 1's, 2's, 3's correct. (missed on Xavier)
I got 6 15's and 16's correct. (I missed Portland St. and American)
Other than that:
Pittsburgh/Connecticut: 4
Drake/Clemson: 5
Southern Cal: 6
Oregon/Arkansas: 9 - I'm quite proud of these two, as I got much hate from people over my seeding for both of these.. only positive in my whole seed list.
Temple: 12
Winthrop/Oral Roberts: 13
Cornell, Boise St., CSU-Fullerton: 14

Seeds within 1 line: 46
Xavier - Me: 4, Them: 3
ND - Me: 4, Them: 5
WSU - Me: 5, Them: 4
West Virginia - Me: 5, Them: 6
Oklahoma - Me: 7, Them: 6
Purdue - Me: 7, Them: 6
Gonzaga - Me: 8, Them: 7
St. Mary's - Me: 11, Them: 10
South Alabama - Me: 11, Them: 10
San Diego - Me: 12, Them: 13
George Mason - Me: 13, Them: 12
Western Kentucky - Me: 13, Them: 12
Siena - Me: 14, Them: 13
Portland St. - Me: 15, Them: 16
American - Me: 16, Them: 15

This leaves 17 teams I missed badly on seeding.

Marquette: Me: 3, Them: 6 - I'm not quite sure why they dropped so low. In retrospect, I can see why Xavier should have been swapped with Marquette on the seed list, and possibly moving them below ND, but I maintain that Marquette has a better resume than Pitt.

Butler: Me: 5, Them: 7 - This one seems pretty clear to me why they were lower than expected. Throughout the year, people noticed that Butler had hardly any good wins. However, the popular consensus was that Butler would get a boost because it was evident that they had attempted to schedule good teams. Obviously, this was not the case.

Vanderbilt: Me: 6, Them: 4 - If I hadn't counted their loss their to Alabama so much, they might have been a 5. I don't know on this one - I think its possible that they got a gift. Other than West Virginia and Butler, I really don't see anyone above them on the seed list that I would have pushed them above.

Indiana: Me: 6, Them: 8 - They might have gotten hosed - however, looking back, I should have put Oklahoma ahead of them. This would have made Indiana a 7 (within one seed line) and made Oklahoma just right. I really should have gone through my seed list a second time.

Texas A&M: Me: 7, Them: 9 - I don't know. Maybe I just overrate Big XII teams.

Michigan St: Me: 7, Them: 5 - This one, I can see. I really screwed up on Michigan St - Undervaluing their good wins, overvaluing their bad losses.

Davidson: Me: 8, Them: 10 - See bit about Butler. The committee apparently doesn't care whether you tried to schedule hard, just if you did anything about it.

Arizona: Me: 8, Them: 10 - Behind Oregon? This I don't understand - Not the seeding, but the relative order.

Kansas St./Baylor: Me: 9, Them: 11 - Further evidence that I overrate Big XII teams. I'll need to remember this for next year. I think that there was no Big XII rep on the committee, so that may have been a factor.

Miami (FL): Me: 10, Them: 7 - I don't understand this one either. The Bracket Matrix average was 9, so it shows that I wasn't alone.

BYU: Me: 10, Them: 8
UNLV: Me: 11, Them: 8 - The committee thought more highly of the MWC than I thought

Mississippi St: Me: 10, Them: 8 - This one I really don't understand. Their best win was Arkansas, and they had losses against UGA and SIU. Perhaps Conference tourney losses don't hurt that much?

Villanova: Me: 10, Them: 12 - My Big East bias, possibly

Georgia: Me: 12, Them: 14 - I'm impressed here. I thought that the committee would be lazy, and merely sub Georgia in for another major conference team. Instead, they made up a full bracket, with Georgia in at a reasonable seed. Kudos to the committee.

Kent St: Me: 12, Them: 9 - I really don't understand this one. Kent St. has a very similar profile to Butler - if Butler had 3 losses to teams outside the top 200. I'll have to look at this one more closely.

So, in short:
1) The committee doesn't care if you tried to schedule well and failed (Butler and Davidson).
2) However, they do care if you didn't try to schedule well (Arizona St.)
3) If you are a Big 6 team without committee representation, prepare to be underseeded. (Big XII)
4) Sunday surprises will be accounted for properly. (Georgia)
5) I should back away from my seed list, and then come back to it. If a team doesn't feel right, get them out (Kentucky, Ohio St.)
6) Don't listen to what popular opinions say (only 19 bracketologists had Oregon in).

Final Note: I cannot confirm or deny the following. However, it appears that Joe Lunardi may have switched Villanova and Virginia Tech at 5:50 - AFTER ESPN got their copy of the brackets. This is supported by the fact that earlier in the afternoon, Nova was 3rd out, and VT was 2nd in. If this is true, this seems quite dishonest. If someone has evidence that this did or did not happen, I would appreciate it.