UConn was the best team in the tourney and it really was not close. Sure they did not play like a #1 team all season, hence their #4 seed. But anyone who watched their first 2 games and knows basketball immediately saw that this was the best team in the tourney. Any other conclusion is just foolish.
While it may seem to be a logical conclusion that because UConn won the NCAA tournament, they were the best team in the tournament...that isn't necessarily the case. Why? The NCAA tournament certainly makes Final Four participants earn a championship BUT here are factors that make identifying the "best" team an inexact science:
1)
Which bracket you end up in can make a world of difference. Miami's opponents were a Murderer's Row (Houston (#1), Texas (#2), Indiana (#4) & UConn (National Champion)) and a pretty darn tough path to the Championship Game. UConn's path to the Championship Game was easier. FAU's path was Memphis, FDU, Tennessee and Kansas State. To me, FAU's path looks significantly easier than ours was. So, a good team that's in an "easy" bracket may get hot at the right time & advance a long way but that doesn't necessarily mean they are one of the best teams in the tourney -- they were partly just in the right place at the right time;
2)
The fact that no #1 seeds made it to the Final Four and FAU was a 9 seed and UM & SDSU were 5 seeds
shows just how inexact a science it is identifying a "true" champion. Why? When the tournament seedings are that far wrong (and they were massively wrong this year), one team could have a much easier path to the Final Four than another. FAU was one buzzer beater away from making the Championship Game. I was really impressed by the athleticism & moxy of FAU. Do I think they are the 2nd, 3rd or 4th best team in Men's College BB? The answer is "no." I don't think they would have fared as well playing in the Big East, SEC or ACC (due to the grind & higher level of competition). That's not to diminish FAU as they did in fact have a great tournament run (for 5 games) and a strong regular season record albeit against lesser competition. Here are just some of the teams that I think were better than FAU this year overall: UConn, Marquette, Creighton, Texas, Kansas, Miami, Duke, UVA, Alabama, & Houston. So, I'd rank them 11th even though they finished one buzzer beater away from the Championship Game; and
3)
Some teams participating in March Madness have injuries at inopportune times. For example, Texas's big man was injured. That could have made all the difference for them. We'll never know because he was unavailable at the worst possible time. Not saying that Texas was better than UConn but it does highlight how crippling an untimely injury can be in the NCAA Tournament. We experienced this with Norchad's inury in the ACC Tournament. You could just sense that we were going to lose against Duke once Norchad got injured. We had destroyed Duke earlier in the season (when healthy). Injuries are a big reason why the "best team" may not always win the Tournament.
UConn was beaten by Marquette in the Big East Tournament. That was a pretty recent event (right before the NCAA Tournament).
Marquette also won the Regular Season Championship in the Big East (with UConn fourth in conference play). I'm a Wharton grad (in addition to attending Miami) and to me I'd rather look at large sample sizes than small sample sizes.
There's a very valid argument that UConn wasn't even the best team in their conference...let alone the NCAA Tournament (because Marquette, Xavier & Creighton all beat them in the regular season in the Big East standings -- a much larger sample size -- and Marquette won the Big East Tournament...and those teams did play in the NCAA Tournament). What is indisputable is that UConn won the NCAA Tournament and looked good doing it in a six-game stretch.
