Looking at the full S Curve, it seems the Committee did split the baby in an equitable way between UVA and Duke. You could argue they shouldn’t have done that and they should’ve just treated Duke as the better team, but assuming they justifiably had UVA and Duke very close to each other, the end result seems fair. The two obviously couldn’t be the 4/5 in the same region, so San Diego State slipped in between them.
The question then is which of the two placements UVA would’ve preferred and which one Duke would’ve preferred. I think if you asked Bennett, he would’ve wanted the 4 in the South, while if you asked Scheyer, he would’ve wanted the 5 in the East.
The opening rounds will be tougher for Duke, but I think Duke should have more of an all-or-nothing approach, whereas UVA should definitely be taking this whole thing one game at a time. If Duke loses to ORU or UT, they weren’t what people thought they were and they weren’t going to win the title anyway, so who cares? This non-threatening, mediocre UVA team might care about making an Elite Eight, whereas I think this Duke team’s goal is squarely set on a national title, with anything else being a letdown.
The middle rounds will be easier for Duke, as they’re being held in the most advantageous arena for Duke outside of Cameron, and Purdue is a significantly easier potential 1-seed roadblock for Duke than Alabama. Purdue is objectively 4 points worse than Bama on a neutral court. The 2s and 3s are also much weaker in Duke’s region than in UVA’s.
Anyway, good job by the Committee on this one, assuming there was actually a case to be made for UVA to be close to Duke in resume. The loss to ORU will be unfortunate, but it is what it is.