Well, the annual March screwing of the mid-major has occurred. Yeah yeah, the Committee's got an impossible task, someone will always be screwed, blah blah blah. You know who the one's that are usually screwed are, don't you? Let's take a stroll down Screwed-Mid Lane, shall we?

Butler: Ranked #10 in the latest Coaches poll, #11 in AP. RPI=17. At worst, should be a 5 seed, right? Nope, got a 7, and basically play a road game against USA, in Birmingham. And IF Butler makes it to the second round, they likely get Tennessee. Somebody in the NCAA clearly doesn't want Butler to do well in this tournament.

While Butler (RPI=17) got a road-game 7, Oklahoma (RPI=27) somehow got a 6-seed. In the latest AP, Butler got 989 votes to Oklahoma's 1. Yep, 1. In the Coaches, it's Butler: 499, OU: 0. Notta single vote. But OU gets a 6 to Butler's (road) 7. Indefensible! Yes, I'm sure OU played a tougher schedule. But isn't that already accounted for in the RPI? I thought that was what the RPI existed for....

Davidson: Ranked #23 in both polls. Rewarded with a 10 seed (!) going against #24 Gonzaga. At least the game's in Raleigh. Which brings us to....

Gonzaga: #24 in AP. Have to travel across country to play #23 Davidson in its home state. Huh?

Top teams left out by RPI: Dayton (32), Illinois State (33), UMass (42), Creighton (46). Notice any similarities with these four? That's right, all mid-majors.

Worst teams by RPI to get an at-large bid: Oregon (58), Kentucky (57), Villanova (51), Kansas State (50). Notice anything similar about these four? You got it, all BCS conference teams. And Oregon not only somehow got in, but received a 9-seed!

And how about the whining about Arizona State, left out while Arizona got in. Wow, my heart really bleeds for ASU. You have to go well down in the RPI, to 83 (!), before you find the Sun Devils. Gosh, they beat Arizona twice, and have a better Pac-10 record than Arizona! And ASU has five wins against RPI Top 50!! So my question therefore is; why is Arizona's RPI at 37, while ASU is at 83? Must be a reason for that, eh? Anyone bother to look at the rest of the resume for ASU? Yes, you beat down Xavier, give you credit for that, but how about other wins that include Cal Poly, Florida Gulf Coast, Delaware State, Coppin State, Idaho, St. Francis (PA), Montana State, and Princeton?

Does the Committee use the RPI at all? I know, they also use "Record vs RPI Top 50" (a completely arbitrary criteria which already figures into the overall RPI#, doesn't it?), and strength of schedule (which also already figures into the overall RPI#, right?). Why these extra criteria? Well, to help the big-boys, of course. Who benefits from "Record vs RPI Top 50" and SOS? Not the mids, that's for sure. And of course the mids would love to boost their SOS, but how can they when no big boys will ever give them a fair home-and-home deal?

Even the NIT isn't immune. Of the nine games I counted between mids and the majors in this year's first round, seven times the major gets the home game. Last year was just as bad, with 11 out of 14 first-round games pitting mids against majors being played at the major. But what do you expect now that the NCAA runs the NIT?

Everything is stacked against the mids, and, well, to be downright literate about it, it sucks large. How many more times do the mids have to prove that they can hang with the big boys? And fans love the supposed underdogs, I mean, wasn't THE story of the '06 tournament George Mason? That's what makes March Madness so much fun to begin with! When will action be taken to stop this constant reaming? It's not even subtle anymore, it's outright blatant, and the mystery to me is that there is mid-major representation on the Committee!! OK, I've gotta go, I'm completely flustered now, about to blow a gasket....