Now that this metaphorical train wreck of a bracket is lying in a smoking heap in front of us, perhaps we should call in the FBBI.

	Aiysha Smith and LSU -- along with Duke -- will become the first No. 1 seeds to play their first-round game on the road.

The Federal Bureau of Bracket Investigation, that is. Agents Mildew and Skullduggery have been assigned because it's an "S'' file, a case in which one or all of the following things apply: stubbornness, stupidity and secrecy.

Let's introduce them to the case, shall we?

First, we'll go back to last year, when it was announced that the women's NCAA Tournament would go to 16 pre-determined sites. We were told that the majority of coaches wanted this. Minus the detail that it was apparently the majority of coaches from programs that essentially have no chance of ever making a Final Four but wouldn't mind sticking it to a "have'' school if at all possible.

We were told it would help schools sell the first two rounds. Minus the logic that the best way to sell them is to have a local draw -- something that was guaranteed to happen under the old system of the top 16 seeds earning the right to host.

We were told this will move us along the path to all neutral sites. Minus the fact that this step was completely unnecessary toward that goal.

And we were told that the bracket would in no way be affected by the host sites, that the "integrity'' of the seeding would be intact. Minus the acknowledgment that it's absurd that in 2003, in what is supposedly the flagship women's sport in college athletics, you have a tournament that had so many built-in flaws before the seeding process even got started.

Basic bracket principle: The foursomes are always the same. No. 1 is with the 8 and 9 seeds and No. 16. No. 2 is with 7-10 and 15, etc.

Which meant, if you have pre-determined sites, you're almost sure to run into at least one situation where you either have to fudge on some of the seedings or you have to send a higher seed to play an early-round game on a lower seed's floor.

The committee did not have to do the latter to any of its No. 1 seeds, although LSU has to open in Eugene, Ore., a hotbed of SEC hoops. But then we get to where the train really derailed, the No. 2-and-below seeds.

There is a potential for two No. 2 seeds, Villanova and Texas, to have to play their second-round games on the home court of the No. 10 seed.

Now it might NOT happen, which is the part the committee focuses on. But it MIGHT happen, and only to some high seeds, not to others.

That's the biggest problem with this whole pre-determined sites thing. Some teams which, through regular-season play, earned the right to having a postseason home-court advantage -- but don't have it because their schools didn't put forth a winning "bid.''

Which fully corrupts the process of having a fair tournament. The problem of a school hosting a regional and thus having the advantage of being at home all the way through the Elite Eight -- such as Tennessee, Stanford and New Mexico have this year -- was bad enough under the old system.

		The fact that regionals continue to be awarded to schools to have on their home courts is embarrassing, a major blight on the tournament. By the time you're down to 16, nobody should have a home-court edge. ... At some point, this has to be put on the NCAA's front burner and fixed for the sake of the tournament saving its credibility.

(The fact that regionals continue to be awarded to schools to have on their home courts is embarrassing, a major blight on the tournament. By the time you're down to 16, nobody should have a home-court edge. The committee says its hands are tied because there aren't enough "neutral'' bids. At some point, this has to be put on the NCAA's front burner and fixed for the sake of the tournament saving its credibility.)

But that issue is at an all-time worst this year, because you have teams such as Duke, LSU and Texas -- three of the best in the country and all national-title contenders -- who don't get to play ANY games at home.

The committee has confirmed that starting next year, teams won't be awarded sub-regionals if they are hosting regionals. Which does nothing to alleviate the mortal injury already done to this year's tournament, nor does it indicate there's a firm timetable on mandating neutral regionals.

What it comes down to is this: The 2003 NCAA Tournament was sacrificed to try out an idea. To put it more personally, one year of the precious-few four that the current student-athletes have was sacrificed.

The committee can say all it wants about how this will increase attendance. Let's see when it's over if the schools with the best attendance aren't the very same ones that would have been hosting under the old system, too.

The committee also can say that this will "spread things out.'' Under the old system, the way things got "spread out'' was through teams getting better the old-fashioned way: earning it. Iowa State, for example, was awful for decades. Then the program built itself up and got a fan following by winning games, not buying sub-regionals.

Finally, the committee will say the whole thing was worth a try because it will "even out'' over the years. If Texas and LSU, in particular, get shafted this year, maybe they won't next year, or two years, or three years from now.

So if you're a senior, don't worry, things might even out eventually. Oh, you say your career is over this season? Whoops.

I don't know who the main Darth Vader figure is behind the implementation of the pre-determined sites, or if it is a group effort. The ball was rolling long before current chair Cheryl Marra of Wisconsin took the job, although she now has to be the defender of this full-of-holes system.

Some will say this is just another of the necessary growing pains of women's hoops. But this isn't 1985. I could buy just about anything back then. Or even in 1992, when TV networks forced the sport into ludicrous Final Four semifinals that started at 9 a.m. on the West Coast.

After two decades of the NCAA Tournament, I refuse to believe "growing pains'' is an acceptable reason to have such radically different paths for teams that essentially should have earned equal paths because of their regular-season results.

Agents Mildew and Skullduggery would like a region-by-region breakdown of the train wreck. So here goes:

	Second-seeded Texas and Stacy Stephens need to win four road games to reach the Final Four.

Mideast Region
Yes, Tennessee can stay at home all the way to the Final Four. But that would have been the case in the old system, too. As mentioned before, the regional issue is a tremendous problem.

But let's look at what pre-determined sites did. I'm not sure exactly what RPI formula the committee used, but according to WBCA/Summerville and Jerry Palm's CollegeRPI.com, Oklahoma had to be pushed down a bit to have a No. 10 seed.

We knew the Sooners couldn't get 8 or 9 because that would have meant a No. 1 had to come to Norman, Okla. Instead No. 2 Villanova does.

First, No. 7 George Washington has to play the Sooners on their home court. Then, there's the chance that Villanova might.

And if Villanova does get out of Norman, it goes to Knoxville. Fabulous.

Then we have No. 3 North Carolina, which might have to beat sixth-seeded Colorado in Boulder, Colo. Sounds fair, huh?

Midwest Region
No. 1 Duke was fortunate geographically that a nearby host, North Carolina State, didn't make the field, so the Blue Devils make that short bus trip. Second-seeded Texas Tech made a winning sub-regional bid.

No. 3 Mississippi State and No. 4 Rutgers both pack their bags for long trips. Mississippi State goes to New Mexico's Pit, where it might face the sixht-seeded Lobos in the second round. Rutgers might meet No. 5 Georgia in Athens, Ga., in the second round.

In other words, the No. 2 seed gets something -- the chance to stay on its home court for two rounds -- that the other top-four seeds don't.

Seems logical, doesn't it?

East Region
I'm not exactly sure how Purdue, with one more loss and a lower RPI than Kansas State, got the No. 2 seed to the Wildcats' No. 3. Perhaps it was that the Boilermakers won the Big Ten tournament final while K-State lost in the Big 12 tournament semis. But the Big 12 did have three teams in the RPI's top 10 -- tournament champ Texas, runner-up Texas Tech and K-State -- and all of them were ahead of Purdue.

But it's not all that important. The difference between getting a 2 or a 3 is incidental, so K-State didn't quibble about it at all. Plus, those two and No. 1 Connecticut are all hosts.

However, fourth-seeded Vanderbilt could be faced with playing No. 12 Old Dominion at ODU's new home in Norfolk, Va. First, No. 5 Boston College has that privilege.

I mean, who doesn't think No. 12 seeds should have a homecourt advantage over 4s or 5s, right?

West Region
This is the catastrophe bracket. Or as Texas coach Jody Conradt said, "the catch-all region.''

Or maybe you could call it the "catch-hell'' region, since that's what Conradt got from the committee earlier this season because she was being too outspoken, apparently, about her disdain for the pre-determined sites system.

Conradt started coaching college basketball the same year Neil Armstrong walked on the moon. She was also, for nine years, the women's athletic director at a school with some of the best women's opportunities in the country. That would be a "BIG-TIME ATHLETIC PROGRAM WITH LOTS OF NCAA TITLES IN MANY SPORTS,'' lest anyone not catch my drift.

But maybe she'll have to coach until age 112 to earn the right to say what she thinks or be acknowledged as knowing more than practically anyone in the universe about what's good for the sport.

The committee giving Conradt a call to tell her to pipe down is insulting and threatening. It's essentially saying, "Remember who's got the power here,'' whether it was put in that tone or not.

Winning the Big 12 regular-season and tournament titles just doesn't mean as much as it used to. Like last year, when that accomplishment got Oklahoma a No. 1 seed and -- before the pre-determined stuff -- two games at home.

Texas and No. 7 seed Arkansas both go to No. 10 Cincinnati for the sub-regional. If the one-time Southwest Conference foes do meet in the second round, you can't think of a better place for it to happen than Ohio, can you?

By the way, Cincinnati is several spots higher on the RPIs I'm looking at than Wisconsin-Green Bay and Washington, but the Bearcats got a 10 seed to UW-Green Bay's and Washington's 8-9 in the West.

Because since Cincy was hosting, it couldn't get an 8 or 9. That would have meant sending LSU as a No. 1 to play on Cincy's home court.

So anyway, instead we get LSU, UW-GB, Washington and Southwest Texas State in the Dead Duck Memorial Sub-regional in Eugene, Ore. I'm sure at least five of those fans who made up the two great crowds for LSU's home games against Penn State and Tennessee this year will find their way out to the West Coast.

And then if LSU and Texas do make the Sweet 16, it will be hosted by a Stanford team that will have had the opportunity to be in the regional semis without leaving Maples Pavilion in the first two rounds.

Again, who could possibly cast aspersion on the idea of a No. 3 seed having advantage over a No. 1 and a No. 2 in both the sub-regionals and the regionals?

Oh, wonder what happened to Agents Mildew and Skullduggery? They've closed the case, saying there is no mystery here.

Anyone could have seen all this coming the minute pre-determined sites was announced.

Mechelle Voepel is a regular contributor to ESPN.com's women's basketball coverage. She can be reached at mvoepel@kcstar.com.