	products recent interviews FastScripts archive about ASAP Sports

Our Clients:

Browse by Sport

Find us on

Subscribe to RSS

Click to go to
Asaptext.com

View our
e-Brochure

NATIONAL COLLEGIATE ATHLETIC ASSOCIATION MEDIA CONFERENCE

March 16, 2008

Tom O'Connor

March 16, 2008

DAVE WORLOCK: Thanks to all the members of the media. We're not going to waste any time so, let's turn it directly over to our first caller. Let's get started.

Q. What kind of impact did the Big 12 Tournament Championship game today have, as far as number 1 and number 2 seeds?
TOM O'CONNOR: It had a big impact. We had a lot of contingency plans. We had eight plans, and all five of the games that played today had implications on the bracket. So, specifically to your question, it did have an effect on a number 1 seed.

Q. As far as, obviously, the crazy situation that happened in Atlanta with the SEC Tournament, what kind of difficulties did that put the committee in, not just from the fact that you had a team that probably wouldn't have been in the field unless they won the automatic bid. But just everything that was going on, and obviously, you had mics live there in the room. What kind of impact did that whole situation in Atlanta have?
TOM O'CONNOR: In all honesty, it was, as everyone knows, it was such an unusual situation. It put us in a little bit of a time crunch. Got a little more stressful for us. But we were prepared with conference monitoring.
The committee did a great job during the past 90 days to be prepared for discussing the teams. When we came in early, we knew that we had a charge to pick the 34 best teams and we stayed on target.
It was interesting with Georgia and Illinois. You know, we were watching that closely, and that had a bearing that if those two teams won, it would have knocked out two, but only one won a game, so it knocked out one team that we, quite frankly, had in the tournament.

Q. Wanted to follow up on the first question about the Big 12 Tournament. Coaches in that league have voiced a concern over the years about the lateness of their game having an effect on their seeding. Did you go into the selection process sensitive to that? It sounds like, obviously, you said you made the change based on the outcome of the game. It didn't give you much time to do it. Can you just talk a little more and elaborate a little bit more about the lateness of the Big 12 and the problems that that presents?
TOM O'CONNOR: It's really up to the conferences to make a determination on when they want to play their championship -- what day, what time of day. We leave it up to them. We don't dictate at all.
But I can tell you I had a very nice conversation this year, I was on conference call with the Big 12 coaches. It was a delightful call. I hope I gave them some insight, and they gave me some insight as well. But it's up to the conferences to make that determination when they want to play their championship.

Q. I wondered first if you could reveal to us the last four in and last four out. Also, what was or were the negatives that kept Ohio State out of the field?
TOM O'CONNOR: Well, I really don't want to get into who were the last teams in last teams out. But I want to be fair with you, because I tried to be fair with the media all along.
Ohio State we looked at very seriously. We were monitoring them during the whole season. But their road record really hurt them, quite frankly. They had only one road win against the top 100.
I don't want to say that was the only reason, because at the end of the process, it's a comprehensive look at all aspects of the season, but that is one that came to the head of the reasoning.

Q. I was wondering can you talk about what you guys liked about Oregon? I think I was a little bit surprised that they are a 9 seed and how maybe they arrived at that. Did you move them up or down the line for purposes?
TOM O'CONNOR: A sign of a good team sometimes is winning on the road. They had three really good road wins against the top 100. In any situation when you get a team to go on the road and play against quality teams and when you win those games it's important.
We've been saying all along as a committee it's who you play, where you play, and how you did. And so with Oregon they had three wins against teams in the top 100. Quite frankly, their strength of schedule overall was pretty darn good.

Q. So it also had to do, obviously, with the Pac-10. That would be a big piece of that for you?
TOM O'CONNOR: Well, really we don't -- well, we don't deal with conferences. We deal with each team as an independent. When we come into the room, all of the teams that are listed on our initial ballot are done alphabetical.
We look at teams as they relate to the rest of the teams - A, in the country, the 327 other teams or, quite frankly, those that we feel on the first blush that we should be looking at. Then, as we're starting to build the field, we then look at that particular team, how they may have done against the field, but not against their conferences.
But the reality of it is we know who is in conferences, so I would be giving you a falsehood if we didn't say when we look at our team sheet that we don't say somebody won in a conference game. But it is more of we look at it as an independent situation.

Q. The seed would seem to indicate that maybe Oregon was not close to being on that proverbial bubble as people thought. Can you discuss why that might not be the case?
TOM O'CONNOR: Oregon was a good team that we were watching all year long. I appreciate the term, "bubble," and I think it's cute and neat, and we even use it in the room. But they were a good team, so we zeroed in on the fact that they were a good basketball team.

Q. I'm asking about Butler getting a 7 seed. I know they had, I think, better numbers in every respect than last year, and they got a five. Pretty much come back to their only playing one game against a top 50? Was that pretty much the deciding factor for them?
TOM O'CONNOR: Well, the deciding factor was how they were as a basketball team. I had a great opportunity to come out here during the Wooden Classic and see them perform on the court. They're a well-coached team, they play hard, they have senior leadership on that team.
When you take a look at their schedule, they've attempted to play good teams. Scheduling for the non-BCS schools is difficult. I can tell you that being in a non-BCS school. But from a perspective of the committee, which really is the only hat that I have on today, I think Butler did as good a job as they could. And we feel they are right where they should be in seed.

Q. I know you said that RPI is a starting point not an end all. Dayton had the highest RPI of any team that didn't get in. Is that a case where the Chris Wright injury had an affect on how you viewed them?
TOM O'CONNOR: The injuries and suspensions, and any type of situation where you might have something different than the norm, a coaching change, you would take that into consideration. Dayton was a tremendous basketball team at the beginning of the year. They really were. But they fell into a situation where they had some significant injuries.
Their center, the freshman center is a heck of a player. But the reality check on that is they had four losses against teams that were below 100 in our data point collection. So you feel for a team like that because of injuries, but injuries are a part of the game of basketball.

Q. We've talked about it before about head-to-head match-ups. If you could specifically talk about how the decision was made, and it may not have been between Arizona and Arizona State, but how you judged Arizona State when they did beat Arizona twice?
TOM O'CONNOR: That's a great question, Andy, it really is. And the first thing I want to say is I think that Herb did a wonderful job with a young team. He probably realized he had a young team coming back and needed to bring them along. I would say -- not I would say, my belief is that they're going to be a very strong program under his leadership in the years to come.
But the reality check is that their strength of schedule was extremely high. It was way up there. Even though the RPI is a data point collection, it does tell you something. If Arizona State would have been selected for the tournament, they would have been the highest RPI ever to go into the NCAA. Please put that on the side though because it's only a data point collection.
The other thing is they were 2 and 7 versus the top 4 teams in the Pac-10 when it's necessary to look at who they play. And like I said before, we do at some point at least have to see who they played. Now we know they beat Arizona twice. We're very cognizant of that.
But in the final analysis, when the committee looked at it while Arizona State was a very good basketball team, the committee didn't feel that they were one of the 34 best teams in the country. At-large teams in the country.

Q. On to follow up on the Arizona-Arizona State question, I guess. Arizona State has tried to make the point that at least part of their intention with scheduling was good and noble. You scheduled the Maui Invitational and some of those teams just don't perform as high as you think they're going to as the season plays out. Do you give any for lack of a better team, visceral credit for that?
TOM O'CONNOR: You know, sometimes you can't have a crystal ball on how things are going to happen. Not sometimes, all the times. I guess, if we had a crystal ball and a lot of things in life that lives would change. If I had a crystal ball, I'd probably still be coaching because I could have told you in advance who I was going to beat and who I was going to lose to. And I would only schedule those games if the crystal ball told me I was going to win.
In this situation here when we're talking about what you said about maybe deserving, and it's a term that, quite frankly, we've dealt with "deserving" and "best." I really believe that when you're talking about the best in terms of scheduling, especially on-court play, you're talking about surpassing all other issues in excellence.
So there is a difference when you're talking about deserving because that's based on merit. And we have consistently said that the teams should be one of the best at-large teams. And when it comes to scheduling, that is part of it.
So putting together their schedule, you have to appreciate what they're trying to do. But they still have to go out and win games against top competition.

Q. Can you tell me about put ting in St. Mary's? They're the third West Coast Conference team. What did it for them?
TOM O'CONNOR: Quite frankly, a lot of teams following up on the last question is strength of schedule. Their strength of schedule was pretty darn good. I think it was in the high 30s. They attempted to go out and play some games non-conference. Not only did they attempt to play those games, they won the games.
Then with St. Mary's, they played eight games it looks like versus non-conference teams in the top 100. As basic as this may seem, winning games is important, and on that statistic of the top 100, they were 5 and 3.

Q. North Carolina, as far as the ACC Tournament, what kind of impact can that have for North Carolina? I would think they were on the 1-line regardless. But did that send them to overall number 1 or were they there no matter what?
TOM O'CONNOR: From a basketball standpoint, North Carolina deserves to be right where they are.

Q. Thank you, two part question. First with Arizona, was Bayless' injury taken into account the games they lost when he wasn't there? And second, is there ever a decision that's based not specifically on the statistics and the numbers that are presented in front of you? But do you look at it and take a subjective opinion of it and say they may not have the best numbers, but we've seen them play, and maybe they're one of the top 33?
TOM O'CONNOR: That's an excellent question. There's a quantitative and qualitative analysis. We have an opportunity as committee members to see teams in person if we can do that. There are some geographical restrictions that a committee member may have and just can't see games because of geography, and some can see more.
And as committee members we'll talk to people throughout the country that have seen the team play or are familiar with the team. I can tell you in the past three weeks I've had a number of people go to those games that I have very much confidence in as basketball people, and they've reported back to me.
With Arizona, they've had the number 2 strength of schedule in the country. The number 4 non-conference strength of schedule in the country. And they were 16-6 with Wise and Bayless in the lineup. So that would say when they weren't in the lineup, they were a different team. But 16-6 with two players of significance tells you a lot when you're looking at it from a basketball standpoint.

Q. I have a question about Virginia Tech. Why, ultimately, did they not make the field?
TOM O'CONNOR: Well, that's as pertinent as question and direct question as I've gotten in the past three weeks, so I'm going to give you as direct answer as I possibly can. First of all, I think Seth Greenberg is one heck of a coach. He's been successful a number of places. He did a great job with a very big, good team.
There are a number of statistics that come out. But I can tell you the one statistic that came out is as we were building the field, it became apparent that they had one win against the field as a whole. They had four losses against versus teams that were below 100. Their non-conference wins versus teams in the top 120 as I just mentioned. And they had no wins in the top 50 until they got to the ACC Tournament and beat Miami.
So statistically when we looked at that part of our process, they didn't measure up to be one of the top 34 at-large teams in the country. They are 1 of the top 65 teams in the country. But our charge is to pick the top 34 teams in the country at-large.

Q. I know you've gotten some questions about Arizona already. But I'm wondering did the fact that Lute was not around for the whole season play a part in any of this?
TOM O'CONNOR: If I'm not mistaken, and somebody can shake their head or shake their head the other way. He stepped out of his coaching duties early in the season, and we looked at what players are on the court.
You know, what happens and what people forget sometimes is that the players are the one that's play the game. Performance on the court is, obviously, extremely important. While the coach is there to be a teacher of the game of basketball during practice and to do all of the things that happen during a game strategically, it's still the players on the court playing.
So when those guys were out, when Wise and Bayless were out, I'm not so sure that was a coaching situation. I think it was the players were out. I think Kevin O'Neal did a nice job with his team this year and they're in the NCAA Tournament. But I can't comment on anything more than what was done on the court this year.

Q. I was just wondering when Syracuse lost to Villanova in the Big East Tournament, pretty much everybody was writing them off. Did they remain in your discussion there in Indianapolis after that win or were they not discussed after that point?
TOM O'CONNOR: Absolutely Syracuse was discussed. I'm going to sound like a broken record, because it's the same situation that I said about Herb and Seth. Jim Boeheim is one of the best basketball coaches in the country and one of the best basketball coaches in the history of college basketball in the NCAA.
He not only did an outstanding job with a young team, but he lost some key players. He lost Devendorf early, that was a solid player with experience. And the job that he did this year was phenomenal in my mind.
I had an opportunity to see Syracuse play, and they were right there. There were a lot of things that we talked about that could have gotten them in the tournament quantitatively and qualitatively. They were right there in our final discussions. But at the end of the day they were one of those good teams that I'm talking about being really good, but we thought there were 34 teams better at large.

Q. I have a couple of questions. I want to turn the injury question around. You talked about how Arizona was without or at full strength versus when they were without Bayless and Wise. Do you also look at the teams that beat them in that situation? For example, looking at Arizona State, both wins over Arizona, Arizona was not at full strength. Is that something that you look at when you consider Arizona State?
TOM O'CONNOR: Sure. We take all of that into consideration, quite frankly. Remember, it's a comprehensive look at all of the aspects of the season. It's not only against one particular team or a team that is playing in a conference. We have to look at it from a standpoint of the entire field, of how we are.
We start off with 328 teams, as you know, and then it's boiled down to a point where we are today with the 34 best teams in the country.
So we take a lot of things into consideration. We didn't penalize Arizona State for that. We really didn't.

Q. You suggested earlier in the call that you weren't able to wear your mid-major hat in there. A lot of people assume you would be a strong voice for mid-majors. Were you not able to be that? And as a follow-up, can you put the George Mason hat on and say whether you're disappointed that it looks like the same old situation here: 28 power league teams, and 6 mid-majors in the slots?
TOM O'CONNOR: I'm not going to put my George Mason hat on. That's unfair to the 34 -- we weren't an at-large, all the other teams in the tournament. Where we are using mid-major, and I hate that term, but where we were with the mid-major is we're exactly where we were last year. Each team has to take a look where they are scheduling-wise.
But I don't look at that as BCS meets mid-major. If a team like X, George Mason, got into the NCAA Tournament a couple of years ago, they got in there because they were a good basketball team, period.

Q. One question about Tennessee. Their strength of schedule appears to be far better than Kansas. I think they played about 16 tournament teams. I just wonder how much their losing the game on Saturday figured in that and why their regular season didn't maybe count for more? And also if you could just address how damaging or where it fit in with Illinois State, their 30-point loss in the Missouri Valley Title game?
TOM O'CONNOR: Your first question is, no, this weekend was just a crazy weekend in a lot of ways it certainly was crazy for us because of all the different scenarios and contingency plans we had to make. But it was also as we all know, a very odd situation for the SEC. We feel for them very deeply.
When we took a look at it, part of us said, and I mean us as a group, you know, that's odd that they're going to have to change the venues. They're going to have to change their practice preparation or game preparation, their meals, possibly hotel. Two games at one time. All of the things that everyone knows about. So we really feel for them.
I'm not going to say that we dismissed all those results because that would be unfair. But we had to put them in a different box to talk about those results in a different way.
But at the same time I really want to congratulate the University of Georgia, because what a great story that is for Dennis Felton and those kids to play two games in one day, and win four games like they did. So I think that is the positive story.
It's interesting that happened in the state of Georgia where people are, I'm sure, going through a lot of pain. It's right there. Maybe it can be somewhat of a rallying point for the people of Atlanta for those who are real Georgia fans.
The second point about Illinois State, I really don't get and I don't think the committee gets into the scoring differential. That is only one game in the scoring differential. You really have to look at Illinois State. They had four losses versus teams below 200. They had a high strength of schedule somewhere in the 70s. Again, their non-conference strength of schedule, which sounds like a broken record, will keep coming up. But that is a factor in our process.
I'm sorry, I said 200, it should have been 100. I correct myself.

Q. Can you talk a little about you just talked about how crazy this weekend was for you. I understand there were some committee members that were in here up almost all night on Friday trying to get in touch with the SEC people. So I wonder if you could describe that process for me? And the contingency plans that you had in place, one at Georgia and Illinois, looks like they might win?
TOM O'CONNOR: I'll answer the first about the contingency plans. We had eight different plans and all five of the games that were played today had implications on the brackets. So it took us a little bit of time with bracketing that we may not have anticipated. However, because we came in early, and because we had massaged a lot of the information early on, we were able to have these contingency plans in front of us.
As to the other night, I want to take, before I talk about what's in the room, I want to congratulate Mark Womack from the SEC who was right there, and those of you saw Mark on TV. He just did a wonderful job in calming everyone down in his interviews while I'm sure he's going through a lot of internal turmoil.
The second part is the whole SEC staff, how they got together and handled a very, very difficult situation in a first-class manner. But leadership always comes from the top. And with the Commissioner such as Mike Slive being at the top, he's going to have good people that make good decisions, and they did.
The decision that was made was made after consultation with the coaches and athletic directors of the SEC and a recommendation upwards. So it was in their hands, but we wanted to be partners with them and be side by side and support them in what had to be done in a very different type of situation that I don't know that anybody has ever had to go through.
But when you go backwards look at what happened in the past couple of days, I give the SEC an A-plus with a couple of gold stars.

Q. You're talking about just what that was like for you that night?
TOM O'CONNOR: That night?

Q. And I know the staff here prepares you for lots of things, but is there a plan in place coming in here for something like that?
TOM O'CONNOR: Somebody had a plan in place for a tornado hitting a major dome? Is that what you mean?

Q. No, I mean in the committee room and how to handle something like that?
TOM O'CONNOR: No, it was interesting. Jean Boyd was standing over here, and we talked about, Jean, why don't you think about any scenario. Not the teams and anything and we just kind of smiled. And 1:00 o'clock in the morning I heard the phone ring, and it was Greg Shaheen on the phone, and he said can you come here in a minute. And Mike Slive was in the room already talking with Greg. Had been on the phone and had a great conversation.
Greg stayed up all night. Mike stayed up half of the night, and I went to bed a lot earlier than they did because I knew everything was in good hands. Oh, Dave Worlock? Dave Worlock hadn't been to bed in 16 days. He has a new world record. And I apologize to my good friends here. I'm sorry, Dave.
DAVE WORLOCK: It's quite all right.
TOM O'CONNOR: Just like you lost your train of thought, I'm starting to lose my train of thought.

Q. (Indiscernible)?
TOM O'CONNOR: It's on the court again. Give you an example with Georgetown and sites and what not. I'll go in that direction. You know, Georgetown, in sight they had a priority because we felt they were a better team. In terms of Georgetown again versus say Duke, is that they couldn't play at the Verizon Center because they were the host plus they play their games there.
So a number of those types of situations fell into place when we were talking about seeding and we were talking about bracketing as well.

Q. That means you would have had a chance to put Tennessee in the same bracket?
TOM O'CONNOR: I may not understand your question.

Q. Did that kind of carry over in not putting Tennessee in the same bracket?
TOM O'CONNOR: I think that where we are right now is we're very comfortable with where we are.

Q. Talk a little about Indiana, and just how you put them in the tournament after everything that's gone on here toward the end of the season?
TOM O'CONNOR: We didn't decide to put Indiana in, they earned their way in. What you do on the court earns your way in. And there are a lot of variables could be a coaching change, player suspension, player injury all of those things we know about. But when it comes right down to it, it's how the team is playing on the court. And we felt that how the team is playing warranted them being in the tournament.

Q. Can you talk about the schedule, and was that almost an overriding factor for them this year as opposed to in the past?
TOM O'CONNOR: I don't think so. Strength of schedule has always been a factor. It wasn't an overriding factor. We've had that on what we call our nitty-gritty sheets for a number of years now. And we take a look at it.
You've heard this expression that you can take a piece of paper and put it over -- I mean, take a piece of paper and slide it between teams. You've heard the expression this year that you could take a piece of tissue paper because it was so thin.
Quite frankly, this year we took the names of the team off of one nitty-gritty sheet and did a blind analysis. We had no idea who the team was. We took a look at strength of schedule like that, and it became apparent that there were some teams that we really had to look at because they went out and played some tough games and won the tough games.

Q. But when I say what was the overriding factor there, and did their performance in the finals determine?
TOM O'CONNOR: Their losses really hurt them. They had losses versus teams below 100. That's probably the overriding factor. Don't look at it as only one thing though. I'd have to really scrub that team sheet right now, and I certainly would if you'd like me to, we can pull it up. But I think that four losses in the tournament and the non-conference strength of schedule again hurt.

Q. Every year presents the committee some challenges. What were the most difficult challenges this year that the committee had to overcome to reach its final incorporation?
TOM O'CONNOR: The contingency plans today were where the five games were being played. We were real comfortable with coming in through the selection process. Coming into Indianapolis in the selection process. We were able to get to a workable number of teams into the initial ballot and into the tournament early.
We worked our way through the teams under consideration pretty good. Seeding, we knew that was going to be more difficult if that happened. But when we got to today and we had to go through the bracketing exercise, and having eight contingency plans, that was the most difficult.

Q. I have a question about Kansas State. Based on the seedings, it would appear that they were one of the final few teams in. How close were they and what kind of put them over the top?
TOM O'CONNOR: I wouldn't say, quite frankly, they were one of the final few teams in. They had some good wins. They had a real good strength of schedule, and they came in third in the Big 12. So that says a lot for Kansas State.

Q. How about the attraction of having a Michael Beasley in the tournament did that play any factor at all? Or can that play any factor at all?
TOM O'CONNOR: We really look at the team as a whole. You can't put anybody into the tournament because of one player. The game is played with five guys on the court, and you put teams in the tournament. You don't put individuals into the tournament. He's a great player though.

Q. Wondering if you could assess Stanford's situation? Were they talked about at all as a 2 seed? And did their non-conference schedule play a role in that?
TOM O'CONNOR: I think what played a role on Stanford is they got two big guys that can really play, and their guards play really well, and they're well-coached. They deserve to be right where they are because of what they did on the court. They're a well-coached basketball team.

Q. Were they talked about as a number 2?
TOM O'CONNOR: Everybody probably in the first I don't know, from 2 to 6, 7 pick a number, talked about going up-and-down. We watched the flow of the conversation, and we watched what's happening in terms of the rest of the field.
So we talk about a lot of teams when we get the seeding. Then we talk about when we get to bracketing that because of the principles and procedures, we have to take a look and sometimes we have to move a team up-and-down. But that's not pertinent to this situation.
We considered maybe eight teams. When we started it may have been a little bit higher, then went lower, then maybe went back up. But I'm really comfortable where Stanford is right now.
By the way, to everybody on the call, I have a tendency to say I'm, when I'm saying I'm, I mean the committee. Give me that little leeway.

Q. You've got a situation where two number 10 seeds, south Alabama and Davidson are just a bus trip away from their regional, and the team that they're playing is coming from well out of there, including Gonzaga that goes from 25 miles to Raleigh. Is that a flaw in the system?
TOM O'CONNOR: Let me just tell you an aside because I'm looking really quick. I got the complete bracket when I was going down the elevator to a conference. I don't have it memorized and I just need to move a piece of paper to get it. But it's the way it fell. In any of those situations, the way the seeding fell.
Looking at it from a perspective that overall I have to be reminding myself that we only really protect the first five lines, and that's part of the principles and procedures and part of the conversation that we have in the room.

Q. Michigan State finishes below Purdue, finishes below Indiana, yet gets a higher seed. Why?
TOM O'CONNOR: The quantitative is the strength of schedule and overall. Quantitative is, you know, when you see them on the court they're a good team when we made that decision. The whole review that we do is really comprehensive. At the end we need to do -- to look at the complete portfolio.
You know, the tournament played somewhat of a role. Better performance in the tournament. You know, they beat Texas, they beat BYU, so it's the complete resume.
I think part of it is they're a good basketball team. They're a good basketball team in this field. We look at these basketball teams versus the rest of the field, and not necessarily how it did in their conference. We know who is in the conference, but it's really important we look at the entire schedule.

Q. A little more specific about Tennessee and Carolina and that 1, 2 in the east. What number was Tennessee among the 2s? Because if Carolina's number 1 overall seed, am I right to assume that Tennessee had fallen all the way down to the 4th number 2 despite their strength of schedule?
TOM O'CONNOR: No.

Q. How would you assess them being in that same bracket?
TOM O'CONNOR: I think the number -- the first eight teams in the country are really strong teams. When you look at those eight teams and you're going towards a national championship, these are the teams that we're projecting that if they keep on winning, we could see any of them in the Final Four.
What we try to do is we try to balance the top four lines, Andy, for each reason, and not necessarily the two top lines. But geographically it made sense to send Tennessee to Charlotte.

Q. Going back to the previous question that had to do with South Alabama. Tennessee's going to be the 2 seed going to Birmingham, a potential second-round match-up with south Alabama. Tennessee going unprotected there?
TOM O'CONNOR: I don't deal in ifs. Long time ago a teacher of mine told me don't deal in ifs. But we don't anticipate match-ups. We can't have a crystal ball. We only protect in the first round.

Q. I wanted to ask you about geographic placement of some of the lower seeded teams. Because I know you really try to make an effort to keep them close to home. On the 13 line you have San Diego going all the way to Tampa, and Winthrop going all the way to Denver, and then the line below, you have Boise and Birmingham and Cornell and Anaheim. I was wondering if there were bracketing rules that forced those teams to travel cross country?
TOM O'CONNOR: We make every effort to keep the teams as close to home as possible, but it doesn't always work out that way. We had a difficult time with that. We had a lot of difficult discussions.
If you remember, and you were in the mock selection, that you saw what happened there. Every once in a while people would lean up on their chair, people would lean back on their chair and stare at the board. Say, "Geez, we'd like to keep that team close to home." But we just can't because of the bracketing and because of the principles and procedures of seeding and bracketing.

Q. Could you talk a little bit about how close a call it was on Baylor, and if that first round loss to Colorado in the Big 12 Tournament was a huge factor?
TOM O'CONNOR: I don't think it was a close call. I think they had a 40 strength of schedule. They had four top wins away from home. Remember what I said before, winning away from home is important. So they did it on the court.

Q. I know committee members recuse themselves when their school is being discussed. What is it like though when Ohio State is not voted in and Gene Smith is their A.D. and he comes back in the room. I know you have a professional responsibility and everyone understands that has to come first. But is it still kind of a little bit awkward?
TOM O'CONNOR: Is it a little bit awkward when you come back in the room?

Q. Yeah. Just the idea that, you know, obviously he would like his school to get in, obviously. But then there is a professional duty. But there is a kind of mixture, I guess?
TOM O'CONNOR: I'm sure it's awkward. And I'm sure if you get to the end of at-large bid selection you're disappointed. But in my almost 35 years being in, maybe more than 35 years in collegiate athletics, Gene Smith is one of the most professional athletic directors I've ever been around. And if he was disappointed, which I'm sure he was, he was very professional about it. At the end of the day, shook hands, hugged people, and handled the situation of not being in tournament about as good as any administrator I've ever seen.

Q. You talked about how wild of a Sunday it was in terms of the game's impacting the bracket. When did you guys finally get done and finished with the bracket? How close to 6:00 o'clock was it?
TOM O'CONNOR: We finished at 5:40, and I missed by a couple of minutes in my goal, but that's okay because we had to wait until after the Georgia-Arkansas game.

Q. In terms of Virginia Tech, if they had beaten North Carolina, would they have been in? Would they come that close if Georgia had loss today?
TOM O'CONNOR: Mark, it's an if. Can't deal in ifs. It didn't happen.

Q. I mean, was the Carolina team if you beat the number one overall team in the tournament, would common sense say that would have done enough to get them in?
TOM O'CONNOR: Mark, I've talked to you through the years a number of times. I think you know I'm always direct. That I can't really deal with an if. It didn't happen.

Q. I was just wondering, how close did Xavier come to getting a number 2 seed? Did their loss in the conference tournament preclude that from happening and how much did their conference strength of schedule help them?
TOM O'CONNOR: Boy, Xavier's a good basketball team, wow, they're strong. But I want to give a lot of credit to the merits of the teams that are before them. Duke, Georgetown, Texas and Tennessee on the line above them are pretty good basketball teams. We'll see what happens down the road.
But Xavier is a good program, strong basketball team this year. If it got to the point where they have to play one of those teams that were above them, it's going to be a heck of a basketball game.
DAVE WORLOCK: Thank you very much. We'd like to take this time to remind you that tomorrow afternoon at 3:00 p.m. eastern we'll have a follow-up teleconference with Tom O'Connor. So if you have questions that need to be addressed then, we ask that you participate on the call. Thank you for participating this evening, and we'll talk to you tomorrow.

End of FastScripts

ASAP Sports, Inc. | T: 1.212 385 0297