And The Award Goes To...

In order to win the NCAA tournament, a team must win six games in a row at neutral sites. All of the No. 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 seeds have had six game winning streaks (or longer) during the season, except for #5 Texas A&M. However, all of these winning streaks have included home games and non-tournament opponents. What team in the 2010 tourney is capable of sustaining a long run against quality opponents?

Well, I'm going to tell you.
It probably won't be much of a shocker.
This time, I actually did my research, though.

I studied the past ten NCAA men's champions (2000-2009) and looked for common threads. A couple of the top teams, like Michigan State in 2000 and Florida in 2006, seemed a little anomalous. The Mateen Cleaves-led Spartans were strange because of their less than potent offense (ranked 79th in Division I) and their overpowering defense (7th). The first Florida championship team was an abberation because it had no first or second team All-Americans. The Gators were also an unimpressive 5-3 in their last eight games before the tournament (and again in 2007). Every other champion in the last ten years has been 7-1 going into the Big Dance (except for last year's Tarheels, who were 6-2).

For the most part, the champions of years past were high-scoring teams (ranked in the top 15 in points per game). With the exception of the 2006 Gators and 2008 Jayhawks, they featured at least one Consensus All-American (as decided by the Sporting News, AP, USBWA and National Association of Basketball Coaches). These champions generally have four or more players who score in double figures (the only team that didn't meet this criteria was the 2004 Connecticut Huskies with its trio of Gordon, Okafor and Anderson). Having multiple scorers is important, because it means that the team won't suffer if one star has a bad performance. In addition, the starters on championship teams are usually experienced players (a hefty combination of seniors and juniors). You can say all you want about Carmelo Anthony's miracle year and his young band of Orangemen, but the fact is, a freshman phenom often doesn't lead his team to a title. If John Wall and DeMarcus Cousins go all the way for the Wildcats this year, then I'll admit I'm wrong.

How do current tourney team compare in these respects? I looked at the No. 1, 2 and 3 seeds and found that only one team really fits the bill. By my predictions, Coach Bill Self will bag another title for Kansas. The Jayhawks rank 5th in scoring offense (81.8 points per game) and 58th in defense (allowing 68.3 points per game). Considering that the past ten champions' average defensive ranking was 108th, that's pretty solid. Kansas has four players who score more than 10 points a game (Collins, Henry, Aldrich, and Marcus Morris). The Jayhawks have at least one likely Consensus All-American in Sherron Collins (and maybe Cole Adrich, by the time the votes are cast). Bill Self's team is also on a roll, winning the Big 12 championship and only losing one game since January 10th.
So how did the other No. 1 seeds not meet my rigorous standards? Kentucky is super young and ranks below Kansas in both scoring and defense. Despite ranking 6th in scoring in the nation, Syracuse is 145th in points allowed per game. Even if we dismiss the seriousness of Onuaku's injury, the Orange has still dropped 3 of its last 8 games. Duke only has three players that it relies on to score points, and doesn't play great on the road. I could go on and on about the faults of other tournament teams. But just take my word for it.

Rock Chalk, Jayhawk.

Today's picture, by the way, is dedicated to my favorite team name in the tournament pool:
Wombats of Doom.