I love the NCAA tournament just like everyone else here, but it's an entertainment product, not a realistic way to choose a national champion. A team's likelihood to advance is almost certainly related to the "luck of the draw", and this is so much more true in a high-variance one-and-done type tournament than it is in a best-of-7 type tournament like the NBA does. The best example of this was 1-seed Virginia losing in the 1st round in 2018 and an almost identical 1-seed Virginia winning the entire tournament the next year. Virginia's entire season was deemed a failure in 2018, but a huge success in 2019, even though they had similar results outside of the tournament.
It's clear in hindsight, we drew the most difficult region. Here's a look at the Sagarin ratings of the teams in our region:
3. Houston (5-seed)
4. Arizona (1-seed)
7. Tennessee (3-seed)
8. Villanova (2-seed)
15. Illinois (4-seed)
20. Michigan (11-seed)
22. Ohio State (7-seed)
36. Seton Hall (8-seed)
So our regional had 4 of the top 8 teams in the country according to Sagarin. Houston was severely under-seeded; Sagarin says they should've been a 1, but probably should've been a 2 in reality. Michigan was very underseeded as an 11. They now look like a 5. Albeit, this includes their tourney play, but even before then, they were 22, which would be a 6 seed. Ohio State looks more like a 6 than a 7, as well. The only over-seeded team in the bracket was Colorado State which Sagarin says should've been a 9. Probably also worth noting on a sheer talent basis, Michigan would be a top 10 team in the country.
Contrast with Kansas, which had a relative cake-walk to the Final Four. They drew the weakest 4 seed as a Sweet 16 opponent: Providence. Sagarin says Providence should've been a 7 or 8 seed. They get Miami in the Elite 8. Miami was #52 according to Sagarin, or essentially like a 13 seed. In this case, Sagarin is probably underrating them (and their recent rating was #20, which would be more like a 5/6), but suffice it to say, this was one of the easier draws. You'd much rather play Miami than Villanova, Houston, Duke, Arkansas, or UNC.
Baylor got unlucky, too, drawing a UNC team that was severely underseeded. UNC should've been more like a 5/6 even ignoring what they've done in the tournament. The same Baylor team that won a national title last year, goes out in the 2nd Round with a bad draw.
My point isn't to excuse our loss. You have to win difficult games to advance at some point and we didn't. Merely to say that we tend to judge coaches by their NCAA tournament results, when in actuality, there's a huge luck element in that tournament. This was a very successful season where we had a bad shooting night against a team with top 10 talent that was severely under-seeded. Even if we had beaten MIchigan, our entire region was brutal, and we would've had the most difficult path to the Final Four of any team.
Barnes has done an incredible job here. I do wish we'd have some luck in the NCAA tournament at some point. If we had played in the Midwest Regional in Auburn's spot, we probably would've gone to the Elite 8. I think we lose to Kansas there (who's playing better than anyone in the country right now), but the season looks much more successful just based on random chance. And while I love the NCAA tournament, I do hate this aspect of this.
In any case, I'm excited about the national title with my other team, UNC. Grew up in East Tennessee, went to UNC.
