Over the next three weeks you’re going to hear a whole lot about Kentucky, and understandably so. The overriding storyline of the 2015 NCAA tournament is whether or not the Wildcats complete a historic run to perfection.  But the reason March Madness captivates us like it does is that there is soooo much more to this tournament than determining a national champion. In fact, it’s essentially three different events -- the first weekend, which is primarily about upsets and Cinderellas; the second weekend, when teams advance to the Final Four, itself a triumphant achievement; and then the Final Four itself.  On Sunday, the committee unveiled the road map for this year’s trifecta. And behind all those names and numbers on the bracket are infinite possibilities of stories waiting to be told.  Here are my biggest takeaways from the bracket:  • It’s impressively balanced across the four regions. It appeared that way when I first looked at the completed bracket, and then a little math confirmed it. Adding up the overall seed numbers, all four regions are within two points of each other. I’ve done umpteen mock brackets since late January, and I don’t think I achieved that level of balance even once. Geography and other bracketing rules usually got in the way.  I especially like how the No. 1 and 2 teams fell. Don’t think Wisconsin deserved that last No. 1 seed? Well the Badgers got matched up with Arizona in a regional much closer to Tucson than Madison. Don’t believe in Villanova? East No. 2 seed Virginia could easily have been a No. 1. Meanwhile, Kentucky got the lowest-ranked No. 2 seed, Kansas, just as it should.  Again, I can’t emphasize enough how rarely things come out that cleanly.  • This is not the year to pick a 15-over-2 upset or a bunch of No. 7 seeds in the Elite Eight. In some years (like last year), the bracket gets blown to pieces by the time we get to the Final Four. This will not be one of them. For one thing, the drop-off between the top two lines and everyone else is more pronounced than I can ever recall. The No. 1 seeds have a combined nine losses, tied with 2008, the lone year in history that all four No. 1 seeds reached the Final Four. And if that’s not enough, three of the four No. 2 seeds also have three or fewer losses. That’s as top-heavy as you’ll ever see a field.  Meanwhile, a rash of conference tourney upsets in the one-bid leagues deprived the field of a whole lot of mid-majors -- Murray State, Louisiana Tech, UC Davis -- that might have had a shot to win a couple of games. There’s still going to be upsets, but I don’t see a 2006 George Mason or 2011 VCU in this field.  • UCLA is one of the most indefensible at-large picks I’ve ever seen. Seriously. The Bruins went 5-10 against RPI Top 100 foes. Temple, the first team left out, went 8-8. Not that anyone got “snubbed” here -- we’re talking about which team is less bad -- but the Owls also had a better road/neutral record (9-8 vs. 4-11) and better non-conference schedule rating (41st vs. 49th). Committee chairman Scott Barnes’ best defense of UCLA is that the Bruins “played [Arizona] really tough.”  Really? We’re giving out tourney bids for moral victories now? Between UCLA and Texas, which finished 3-12 against the Top 50, the committee basically said it’s better to be mediocre in a power conference than, in the case of Colorado State and Temple, close to the top in a next-level-down league. Which kind of stinks.  • The committee loves it some Big 12. The ACC has more mystique, the Big Ten gets more exposure, but the Big 12 was near universally regarded as the nation’s top conference this season and it showed in the seeds. How often does a conference put four teams (Kansas, Iowa State, Oklahoma and Baylor) on the top three seed lines? And I’d argue the Cyclones, who won two out of three meetings with the Jayhawks, including Saturday night’s conference title game, could have easily merited a No. 2 seed as well.  Now the conference has to deliver. Anything less than one Final Four team and/or two or three Elite Eight teams would be considered a disappointment.  • Everybody’s going to pick against Georgetown. John Thompson III’s Hoyas have infamously bowed out to a double-digit seed in their past five tourney appearances, most recently Florida Gulf Coast two years ago. So of course this year Georgetown drew Eastern Washington, a deceiving No. 13 seed that won at Indiana early in the season. Chances are it will be the second-most popular Round of 64 upset pick behind Buffalo-West Virginia. That classic 5-12 matchup pits two teams separated by four spots in the RPI ratings. (WVU is 24th, Buffalo is 28th.)  • How cool would it be if Kansas and Wichita State met in the Round of 32? No one believes it, but the committee does not rig the bracket to create juicy matchups. It’s barely possible. In fact, I had this same potential pairing in my own last mock bracket and didn’t even realize it until someone pointed it out on Twitter. But now that it may be here -- great!  Not only would Shockers fans kill for a chance at their more fabled in-state foe but it’s actually a legit upset spot. The Jayhawks, dealing with Cliff Alexander’s suspension and various injuries, are definitively mortal. Wichita doesn’t have the resume to merit a much-higher seed but we know Gregg Marshall’s 28-4 team is pretty good. Now that I said that, watch the Shockers lose to Indiana.  • Dayton should not be allowed to play in Dayton. First of all, I don’t understand how the 11th-seeded Flyers wound up so far down the seed list to begin with. I had them as a No. 9 seed, and in fact, they were the only team in the entire field that I missed by more than one seed. But not only that, they were the last at-large team in, period. So yeah, rules are rules, and the last four teams in the field play in the Tuesday and Wednesday night play-in games. (The NCAA just sent an electric shock through my chair for calling them that, but that’s what they are.)  But how is that fair to Boise State, which actually came in one spot higher on the committee’s list but now has to travel and play a true road game just to get into the Round of 64? Heck, how is it fair to Dayton? The NCAA says it wants those First Four teams to get a true tourney experience. The Flyers aren’t getting that experience, though they are getting home-court advantage. Would anyone really mind if the committee had swapped Dayton with one of the other No. 11 seeds? Like, say, UCLA?  • Finally, the best way to win your office pool is to pick someone other than Kentucky. Yes, that sounds insane. Why would anyone in their right mind pick against the undefeated Wildcats? But that’s the problem. Everyone IS going to pick Kentucky, which means your pool is going to be decided by who does best in the other rounds.  Or …. You could ride a hunch that one of the other 67 teams is going to cut down the nets, which means even if you stumble a little early; if, say, Arizona wins the thing, and you actually pick the Pac-12 champs … you’re probably going to win the pool, regardless of how many Round of 32 games you get wrong.  It’s March Madness. Anything can happen. Heck, after writing what I did above, UCLA is probably going to the Elite Eight now. So enjoy Act 1 of the tourney this weekend. It’s going to be a blast. We’ll worry about national titles later.  Stewart Mandel is a senior college sports columnist for FOXSports.com. He covered college football and basketball for 15 years at Sports Illustrated. You can follow him on Twitter @slmandel. Send emails and Mailbag questions to Stewart.Mandel@fox.com.
NCAA tournament is as top-heavy as ever with perhaps strongest 1- and 2-seeds, but in order to win pool, you may have to pick against Kentucky ... and UCLA has no business in tournament.