(03-16-2015 09:49 PM)_C2_ Wrote: This goes back to what I said in the other threads about the TV execs having their hands somewhat on this, as this was quite possibly a made-for-TV matchup. It may also be why they were slotted here and not in the play-in round as they deserved (well, they deserved another fate but that's another story).
Yes sir -- we tend to forget that the "Tourney" is a "made-for-TV" event, and get caught up in "this team 'deserves' to get in because they were 32-1 playing in a Texas Valley League", and forget -- this is a TV event in which the networks are selling ad time slots.
Those "ad time slots" require the tourney to draw "eyeballs", and what draws in those eyeballs are either brand names (Kentucky, Duke, Kansas, Indiana) or coaching personalities (Coach Cal, Tom Izzo, Coach K, etc).
Your mid-major powerhouses aren't going to draw the same number of eyeballs as your average P5, unless your school is named "Gonzaga"
UCLA, tainted as they may be (and they ARE), will draw eyeballs, and the secret "media delagate" on the committee likely pushed HARD for their inclusion. And probably due to the scarce number of "brand name" teams from the western US in the field: Arizona, UCLA, Gonzaga, and Oregon -- that's it.
$0.02
---
This "media reasoning" also explains why Kentucky and Duke have EASY paths to the Final Four, and possibly why Villanova got a stacked deck in the East.