Follow us:

Pac-12 Confidential

Bud Withers offers an inside look at the Pac-12 Conference and the national college scene.

March 10, 2012 at 10:02 PM

Washington’s last, best hope . . .

As we speak, there are maybe only 12-14 people who know whether Washington is part of the 2012 NCAA basketball bracket — the 10-person committee and a handful of NCAA staffers who ramrod the process in Indianapolis.

At mid-afternoon, Jeff Hathaway, the Big East consultant who chairs the basketball committee, told CBS Sports his panel had decided on the 37 at-large participants. Of course, one of those could be kicked to the curb if St. Bonaventure beats Xavier in the Atlantic-10 final Sunday, which would squeeze the bubble by one entry.

Washington? What makes this decision so provocative is that it’s never happened in the history of the tournament — the notion that the committee is having to weigh a power-six-conference regular-season champion. We’ve come to expect that conference regular-season champions — and usually two or three teams that trail that one — will be invited to the NCAAs. But this isn’t any old year.

In mulling this whole dynamic, I could see one or more committee members making the excruciating final call on his/her last couple of bubble teams and taking an extended look at the Huskies in the non-conference. True, it was only a 5-5 record, but if you’re looking for evidence that they can compete, you see a one-point loss to Marquette, a loss by six to Duke, and a thriller on the road at Nevada. And maybe you look at the other metrics, you don’t see much to choose, and you make the call to vote them in over a North Carolina State or Miami or Brigham Young. It’s not as though the bubble is a collection of rock-solid resumes.

Saturday, the consensus of the national pundits is that the Huskies are toast, if narrowly. I’d tend to agree with that; if you crunch their resume against a lot of the other competition, it’s not much to look at. But as a final word, this is worth saying: Until the final word is dispensed, we’re all just guessing. As long as the selection is a matter of subjectivity, Washington has a shot — until Jeff Hathaway says it doesn’t.

Comments

COMMENTS

No personal attacks or insults, no hate speech, no profanity. Please keep the conversation civil and help us moderate this thread by reporting any abuse. See our Commenting FAQ.



The opinions expressed in reader comments are those of the author only, and do not reflect the opinions of The Seattle Times.


The Seattle Times

The door is closed, but it's not locked.

Take a minute to subscribe and continue to enjoy The Seattle Times for as little as 99 cents a week.

Subscription options ►

Already a subscriber?

We've got good news for you. Unlimited seattletimes.com content access is included with most subscriptions.

Subscriber login ►
The Seattle Times

To keep reading, you need a subscription upgrade.

We hope you have enjoyed your complimentary access. For unlimited seattletimes.com access, please upgrade your digital subscription.

Call customer service at 1.800.542.0820 for assistance with your upgrade or questions about your subscriber status.

The Seattle Times

To keep reading, you need a subscription.

We hope you have enjoyed your complimentary access. Subscribe now for unlimited access!

Subscription options ►

Already a subscriber?

We've got good news for you. Unlimited seattletimes.com content access is included with most subscriptions.

Activate Subscriber Account ►