With the Pac-10’s struggles this season, the Mountain West is in position to place more teams with better seeds in the NCAA Tournament. New Mexico, which sits atop the Mountain West, is poised to benefit the most because the Lobos are a viable candidate for a No. 3 seed or better, which might just be the ticket for an improbable Final Four run.
Since 2000, 80 percent of all Final Four participants have had a No. 1, 2 or 3 seed in the NCAA Tournament. Although the George Masons of the basketball nation dream of a Cinderella run to the Final Four, only eight teams in the past 10 years made it with a seed worse than No. 3. And it only happened in four seasons: 2000, 2002, 2005, 2006. Since LSU and George Mason did it in 2006, the top seeds have reasserted their domination with eight No. 1 seeds, three No. 2 seeds and one No. 3 seed filling the 12 spots of the 2007, 2008 and 2009 Final Fours.
New Mexico is a long shot to reach the Final Four. Vegas gives the team only 200:1 odds to win the national championship, which matches the odds for Iowa and Iowa State, which have no chance at reaching the NCAA Tournament without an automatic bid. But the Lobos will have a statistically much better chance if they can continue to rack up quality wins and earn a top three seed.
After beating UNLV Wednesday night, the Lobos have seven wins against the RPI top 50, which ties them with Duke for second most. The knock on New Mexico is the lack of an elite win. The best win on the team’s résumé is a neutral court victory against Texas A&M. That makes the Lobos vulnerable to being leap-frogged by teams like Pittsburgh, Tennessee an Temple — all of which have elite victories (Pitt won at Syracuse, Tennessee handed Kansas its only loss, and Temple claims one of Villanova’s two losses).
Logically, teams that are good enough to earn a No. 1, 2 or 3 seed have the proven performance and talent to contend for a Final Four spot. In addition, they have an easier road than No. 4 seeds and lower. Is there really a major difference between the No. 12 and 13 teams in the country entering the NCAA Tournament? Probably not. However, the No. 12 team gets a No. 3 seed and is likely to draw a No. 6 seed — in theory, a team ranked somewhere between 21 and 24 — in the second round. On the other hand, the No. 4 seed most likely draws a No. 5 seed in the second round. Depending on where the selection committee slots teams, the No. 13 team could draw the No. 17 team in the country.
The second round match ups don’t follow a classic S-curve pattern — in which the best No. 4 seed would play the worst No. 5 seed — because the selection committee stops following the pattern after the top 16 teams. From there, they place teams based on other tournament rules, such as avoiding conference match ups and rematches of early season games. For a team like New Mexico, a No. 3 seed could mean a likely second round match up against an opponent such as Xavier or Butler. However, slipping to No. 4 could produce Georgia Tech or Michigan State.
In addition to the luck of the draw, seeding matters in determining where a team plays. The selection committee awards favorable first and second round locations based on seed. So expect to see Kansas in Oklahoma City and Syracuse in Buffalo. Do you think Jayhawk and Orange fans will drive four hours or less to see their teams play? Oh yes. For New Mexico, Oklahoma City is the only location for opening-round games located within a 12-hour drive of Albuquerque. That makes the Lobos’ push for a No. 3 seed — preferably ahead of Texas — even more important. Otherwise, New Mexico could find itself heading to San Jose, where misfortune could produce a second-round match up with Gonzaga and a hostile crowd.
Championship teams require talent, and they often are peaking at the right time of year. For teams on the cusp of joining the elite, the difference between a Final Four run and second-round exit might be one spot on the selection committee’s S curve, giving one team a No. 3 seed and the other a No. 4 seed.
