Yahoo Sports 
NCAA's tweaks to selection process are subtle but much-needed
The NCAA announced a pair of subtle but smart tweaks to its selection and seeding process on Monday, one to prevent last March's biggest controversy from reoccurring and the other to avoid a potential issue that nearly arose at the top of the bracket.
The first change ensures that the last four at-large teams voted into the 68-team tournament field no longer automatically are sent to the First Four. Now the selection committee has the freedom to elevate one or more into the main draw if the ensuing seed scrubbing process reveals they a stronger resume than a team initially voted in ahead of them.
This change should be known as the UCLA rule even though the NCAA's release makes no mention of the Bruins. It's a clear response to the uproar over UCLA receiving a spot in the NCAA tournament's main draw last March when many analysts were skeptical Steve Alford's team even had a resume worthy of the First Four.
UCLA's inclusion in the main draw ahead of the four teams sent to the First Four and at-large snubs Temple and Colorado State was controversial because the Bruins were 4-12 away from home on the season and had only beaten four top 100 RPI opponents all season. The furor lingered even after UCLA proved itself by advancing to the Sweet 16, a run aided in part by a dubious goaltending call in the opening round against SMU and a cushy round of 32 draw against 14th-seeded UAB.
“It’s a small, yet significant, alteration to the language outlining our seeding process,” said Joseph R. Castiglione, the vice president and director of athletics at the University of Oklahoma and the chair of the Division I Men’s Basketball Committee for the 2015-16 season.
“Making this change gives the committee the opportunity to properly seed every team, whereas previous procedures did not permit appropriate scrubbing of the last four at-large teams," said Oklahoma athletic director Joseph Castiglione, the selection committee chair.
“Selecting teams usually involves looking at teams in groups of eight. Scrubbing is comparing two teams against one another and sometimes there’s greater clarity during that process due to head-to-head competition, record versus common opponents or wins against tournament teams. This tweak provides us with the opportunity to scrub teams even more thoroughly.”
The other adjustment to the selection process gives the committee greater flexibility to balance the top two seed lines.
Bracketing principles previously dictated that the committee prioritize geographic proximity over competitive equity when assigning the No. 1 and 2 seeds to a particular region. Now the committee can consider moving the strongest No. 2 seed out of its natural geographic area to avoid placing it in the same region as the No. 1 overall seed in the tournament.
This change is a response to how close the committee came to having no choice but to send Wisconsin to the same region as then-undefeated Kentucky last March. Only the Badgers' late ascension to the last No. 1 seed enabled them to avoid joining the Wildcats in Cleveland, where two of the strongest teams in the entire field could have met in the Elite Eight. Wisconsin instead upset Kentucky a week later in the Final Four.
“This change doesn’t mean we are going to a true S-Curve but if we can achieve it, or come closer to having more competitive balance on the top two lines without compromising our existing principles and without putting a team at a great disadvantage, we will consider it," Castiglione said.
While I still believe competitive balance should be prioritized over geographic proximity in all decisions pertaining to teams on the top four seed lines, this is at least a step in the right direction.
There's no way Wisconsin would rather have played Kentucky in Cleveland in the Elite Eight than a weaker opponent somewhere else. Thanks to this small but important rule change, teams in the future won't face that problem.
- - - - - - -
Jeff Eisenberg is the editor of The Dagger on Yahoo Sports. Have a tip? Email him at daggerblog@yahoo.com or follow him on Twitter!
