Once-lowly Northwestern lands 1st NCAA tourney bid, 'Nova overall No. 1
For pure drama, best wait till the shots start flying.
For sheer excitement, Selection Sunday belonged to Northwestern.
Though it was no surprise when that school's name popped into the NCAA Tournament bracket, it was a reminder that, yes, this is March Madness — that time of year where anything can happen. The Wildcats, longtime losers in the Big Ten, officially were invited to the tournament for the first time in school history, and the group-hugging, selfie-taking reaction from the players (and others) when their name came up showed how much the accomplishment really meant.
“When I came here four years ago, it was a belief in a day like today,” said coach Chris Collins, whose team won 23 games on its way to the tournament.
Another set of Wildcats — the ones from Villanova — were given the tournament's top overall seed. The defending champions were joined by Kansas, North Carolina and Gonzaga on the “1” line — a quartet that produced little in the way of head scratching.
With the brackets set, the action begins Tuesday and Wednesday with opening-round games that will include matchups between the last at-large teams invited into the draw: No. 11 seeds Providence vs. USC and Kansas State vs. Wake Forest.
The tournament gets into full swing Thursday, with the Final Four set for April 1 and 3 in Phoenix. Villanova, which won the title last year on a buzzer-beating jump shot by Kris Jenkins, will open its quest for back-to-back titles against the winner of an opening-round game between New Orleans and Mount Saint Mary's.
“I want the guys to enjoy it tonight, and then tomorrow, we're just one of 68 teams,” Villanova coach Jay Wright said.
Though Kansas was the overall second seed, it opened as the favorite in Las Vegas, at 8-1. North Carolina and Villanova were next at 9-1, followed by Gonzaga, Duke and Kentucky at 10-1.
Overall, the bracket produced more small quibbles than true blockbusters.
If there was any debate about the top, it was about whether Duke (27-8) really belonged as a No. 1 instead of a No. 2, which is where it ended up. The Blue Devils won four games in four nights at the ACC Tournament and have beaten the rival Tar Heels (27-7) twice. But Mark Hollis, the chair of the selection committee, beat back that debate quickly, telling the commentators on CBS (who dragged out the bracket reveal for more than a half hour) that Duke entered the week as a No. 4 seed.
And though the Blue Devils kept winning over the weekend, “they got stopped on the way by teams that won both their regular-season and conference tournaments (Kentucky and Arizona) and they were never compared to teams on the No. 1 line,” Hollis said.
Teams that didn't make it off the bubble included Syracuse and Illinois State.
Syracuse was vulnerable because of its 84th ranking in the RPI and 2-11 record on the road.
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.