Bracketology
Welcome to Bracketville’s home for Bracketology. This is where you will find bracket projections and seedings for the 2012 NCAA Tournament. We use current data, key wins and losses, power data, strength of schedule, and overall evaluation along with team expectations and future projections to develop the weekly bracket. It’s not strictly based on if the season ended today.
UPDATED: Sunday, March 11 | 4:45 p.m. (ET)
Teams in CAPS represent the projected AUTOMATIC bid. Exceptions are made for teams that use an abbreviation (UTEP, BYU, etc). Records are for games against Division I teams only.
FIRST FOUR PAIRINGS – Dayton (First Round)
- Drexel vs. NC State | East Region
- South Florida vs. California | East Region
- MS VALLEY STATE vs. WESTERN KENTUCKY | South Region
- VERMONT vs. NORFOLK STATE | Midwest
BRACKET PROJECTION …
| EAST – Boston | MIDWEST – St. Louis | |
| Pittsburgh | Louisville | |
| 1) Syracuse | 1) Kentucky | |
| 16) UNC-ASHEVILLE | 16) MS VALLEY ST / W. KENTUCKY | |
| 8) San Diego State | 8) Gonzaga | |
| 9) Saint Louis | 9) Connecticut | |
| Portland | Albuquerque | |
| 5) VANDERBILT | 5) Cincinnati | |
| 12) Drexel / NC State | 12) Virginia | |
| 4) Indiana | 4) Wisconsin | |
| 13) OHIO | 13) SOUTH DAKOTA ST | |
| Columbus | Nashville | |
| 6) MURRAY STATE | 6) CREIGHTON | |
| 11) South Florida / California | 11) Colorado State | |
| 3) Michigan | 3) LOUISVILLE | |
| 14) BELMONT | 14) DAVIDSON | |
| Greensboro | Omaha | |
| 7) Kansas State | 7) ST. MARY’S | |
| 10) Xavier | 10) SOUTHERN MISSISSIPPI | |
| 2) Duke | 2) MISSOURI | |
| 15) LEHIGH | 15) DETROIT | |
| SOUTH – Atlanta | WEST – Phoenix | |
| Greensboro | Columbus | |
| 1) North Carolina | 1) MICHIGAN STATE | |
| 16) VERMONT / NORFOLK ST | 16) LAMAR | |
| 8) Iowa State | 8) Notre Dame | |
| 9) Purdue | 9) Alabama | |
| Portland | Nashville | |
| 5) Florida | 5) Wichita State | |
| 12) LONG BEACH ST | 12) Texas | |
| 4) Georgetown | 4) Florida State | |
| 13) ST. BONAVENTURE | 13) COLORADO | |
| Albuquerque | Louisville | |
| 6) UNLV | 6) NEW MEXICO | |
| 11) Seton Hall | 11) VCU | |
| 3) Baylor | 3) Marquette | |
| 14) MONTANA | 14) NEW MEXICO ST | |
| Pittsburgh | Omaha | |
| 7) Temple | 7) MEMPHIS | |
| 10) West Virginia | 10) HARVARD | |
| 2) Ohio State | 2) Kansas | |
| 15) LONG ISLAND | 15) LOYOLA-MD |
NOTES on the BRACKET: Kentucky is the No. 1 overall seed followed by Syracuse, North Carolina, and Michigan State. Next in line are Kansas, Missouri, Ohio State, Duke
Last Five teams in (at large): Seton Hall, California, South Florida, NC State, Drexel
First Five teams out (at large): Mississippi State, BYU, Marshall, Northwestern, Miami-Fla
Also considered: Washington, Tennessee, Oral Roberts, Middle Tennessee State, Mississippi
Adjustments: Several one-line adjustments were needed to follow correct bracketing principles.
Here is the team breakdown by Conference …
Big East (10): Syracuse, Georgetown, Louisville, Connecticut, Marquette, West Virginia, Notre Dame, Cincinnati, Seton Hall, South Florida
Big Ten (6): Ohio State, Michigan State, Indiana, Wisconsin, Michigan, Purdue
Big 12 (6): Baylor, Missouri, Kansas, Kansas State, Iowa State, Texas
SEC (5): Kentucky, Florida, Mississippi State, Vanderbilt, Alabama
ACC (5): North Carolina, Duke, Virginia, Florida State, NC State
Mountain West (4): UNLV, San Diego State, New Mexico, Colorado State
Atlantic 10 (3): Xavier, St. Louis, Temple, St. Bonaventure
West Coast (3): Gonzaga, St. Mary’s
Conference USA (3): Memphis, Southern Mississippi
Missouri Valley (2): Creighton, Wichita State
Pac 12 (1): California, Colorado
Conference leaders/champions … WESTERN KENTUCKY (Sun Belt), DETROIT (Horizon), OHIO (MAC), VCU (CAA), NEW MEXICO STATE(WAC), MURRAY STATE (OVC), LOYOLA-MD (MAAC), MONTANA (Big Sky), DAVIDSON (Southern), SOUTH DAKOTA STATE (Summit), LONG BEACH STATE (Big West), LONG ISLAND (NEC), BELMONT (Atlantic Sun), HARVARD (Ivy), NC-ASHEVILLE (Big South), NORFOLK STATE (MEAC), LEHIGH (Patriot), VERMONT (America East), LAMAR (Southland), MS VALLEY STATE (SWAC)
Interesting bit on basketballprospectus this morning about predicting the bracket using rpi+kenpom rating. Only discrepancies with your bracket versus that system is Seton Hall, Zona, Northwestern are in & NC State, Cincinnati & Mississippi are out. That system also has La Salle & S Dakota St. just missing a bid. Also curious why St. Mary’s is so low and/or why not flip them with WVU and let them stay out west?
There are a lot of interesting numbers when you start comparing Sagarin, Kenpom, and other stats like tempo-free, adjusted scoring margin, etc. They have a place in comparing how teams perform relative to efficiency, etc. But the bottom line is winning games against credible competition. Who did a team beat? Where did they beat them? What teams did they choose to play outside the conference? Can a team win away from home? In the case of St. Mary’s, the Gaels best non-conference wins are Northern Iowa, Missouri State, and Weber State. All good teams, but only Weber State would be make the tournament today – as an automatic qualifier. St. Mary’s non-conference schedule ranks No. 161. When the February 6 bracket was put together, St. Mary’s was No. 25 on the s-curve; making the Gaels the Top 7 seed. Seems about right when the teams in front of them are Indiana, Murray State, Virginia, Vanderbilt, and Wichita State. As to placement, the s-curve pushed St. Mary’s East in balancing the bracket. There were also considerations when placing other seven seeds due to conference conflicts and bracketing principles. Thanks for your interest.
That is where you are wrong, the bottom line is not just wins and losses according to the committe “good losses” are also looked at. This is why ranking systems such as BPI, Kenpom and Sagarin are far superior than RPI. Ask any professional bookmaker and they will tell you RPI is a joke. The committee recognizes this, but novice bracketologists don’t which is why you inexperience prognosticators over emphasize RPI.
Someone needs to tell the bracketologists of the world that Minnesota stinks. I can’t believe they’re even in the discussion. They lost again last night and are 5-8 in the Big 10. If they were to get in over LBSU or Murray or Creighton, it would be a digrace.
When the latest bracket was posted, Minnesota had not lost to Ohio State at home. In this scenario, the Gophers were not compared against LBSU, Murray, or Creighton. LBSU and Murray were “automatic qualifiers” as projected league champions. Instead, compare the overall resumes of the other teams listed among the Last IN and First OUT at the time of the projection.
Totally understand. However, we are at the point in the season when we need to start discussing if LBSU, Murray St., So. Miss and others don’t win their conference tourneys. How do they stack up against 7th, 8th placed teams in power conferences?
Illinois will need to go 3-1 in final 4 games just to reach 8-10…they play at Ohio State, at Wisconsin and home to Michigan in 3 of the 4 games.
Safe to say Illinois is almost done. 7-11 in the Big 10 won’t cut it.
I had a question on how the committee rewards teams’ out of conference schedule. I know you said, they committee likes to see you challenge yourself out of conference, but I was wondering how they would look at a team like SLU. They played Washington and then also had games against Villanova, Boston College, Oklahoma, and SIUC. Normally those teams would be better and while they weren’t projected to be outstanding, when SLU scheduled them, they were still probably projected to be better than they are now. Would the committee take that into consideration or do they just look at how the team performed?
Jake, great question. This actually was discussed during the Mock Selection event. Bottom line is this … teams can receive some “credit” for trying to schedule well. But for a particular season, only that season’s results can be used to compare and contrast resumes. Here’s an example: someone schedules a really good team that’s loaded with seniors. Those seniors graduate. When the two teams play the next season, the now young team struggles. It wouldn’t be accurate to credit a team for playing an opponent based on how good the opponent was before was versus how good the opponent is now – the team they actually played. Does that help?
Ok that makes sense. Another question somewhat related: How does the committee look at conference schedules? Obviously the schedules can be unbalanced. One team from the Big 12 could have a higher strength of schedule because they play Missouri and Kansas twice. Does the committee look at the or do they try to concentrate more on non conference strength of schedule?
All of those factors are considered. With unbalanced schedules, you have to evaluate each team’s schedule from all angles. That’s why there’s no magic number of league wins that earn an NCAA bid. Non-conference SOS reflects a team’s willingness to play quality competition. Team’s can’t control their conference schedule, but they can control who they play out of conference. That’s been a point of emphasis in recent years.
On Minnesota: They’ve played already nine games in conference against teams you project to be in the tournament (plus Illinois, who was hot at the time). If they upset Michigan State this week, I can see them beating Indiana at home, Wisconsin on the road (at least four losses in Kohl Center in conference already), and Nebraska. Then, they would get a gimme game in the first round of the conference tournament vs. Illinois, Penn State, or Nebraska (or a rematch against Iowa). Win just three of those first four and they’d still get to 20 wins with the 1st round conference win.
If they win 20 games and finish 0.500 in conference play (the committee doesn’t even look at conference records though), I don’t see them getting denied a spot in the NCAAs.
If your scenario unfolds, Minnesota would be in the conversation. But there is no “magic” number of wins that gets a team in. It’s a huge myth that 20 wins means NCAA tournament. Today, we have unbalanced league schedules and teams play more regular season games. Look at South Florida right now … they have 10 Big East wins. But who were those 10 wins against? Plus, what if there are three or four significant upset in league tournaments?
South Florida shouldn’t be anywhere near the dance conversation. In their one matchup with a Big Ten team, they lost to Penn State. There’s no comparing the Bulls and the Gophers … notice I said that Minnesota has already played nine games- 12 overall- against teams that are either locks or are in the discussion; with three more to go.
Illinois is in trouble but the conference record is not a consideration but the overall resume is taken into consideration. Illinois would have to probably go 3-1 to have serious consideration.
Conference record can be a consideration, but it’s not as weighted as you might think. In other words, it’s not accurate to say, well, 9 wins in Conference ABC get’s you a bid. That said, a team has to demonstrate a full body of work, and teams that lose a lot of conference games (and thus games) will have trouble earning a bid. Illinois has games left at Ohio State, Michigan, Iowa, and at Wisconsin. Going 3-1 would mean the Illini would post two more Top 25-ish RPI wins. That would keep them in the at-large picture. Hard to see that happening right now, but Illinois isn’t dead, yet.
Also i think Illinois would to at least get to the semis in the Big 10 tourney as well…
Just an FYI…New Mexico and San Diego St. can’t be in the same regional. First three teams from any conference must be in separate regionals per the NCAA rules. Easy enough to swap the SDSU/Memphis for Gonzaga/UCONN though.
You are exactly correct. Didn’t notice that (even with a double-check) until after I posted the bracket. It’s a good thing the NCAA has software to help catch such mistakes. As for me, I have to rely on brainpower that sometimes (more often as I age) misfires. Thanks for your interest! Glad you noticed. Stay in touch.
If, MSU wins the the B1G reg. Season Title, but OSU wins the tournament do both get 2 seeds or will one be knocked down to a 3?
In that scenario, I think both would be no worse than 2-seeds.
same situation, same outcome (both are 2 seeds) who gets the game in Pittsburgh and who gets the game in Greensboro/Omaha?
And along the same lines, if MSU still ends up a 1 seed and OSU ends up a 2 seed, but MSU plays in Phoenix and OSU get the game in Pittsburgh how is that looked at? Because (as an MSU fan) I might trade the 1 seed in Phoenix for a 2 seed in Pittsburgh where my fans can travel to much easier. How is that looked at?
If conference records aren’t weighted, then why is USF even considered? They’ve beat up on the bottom of the Big East and did damage (to themselves) out of conference. That Big East record is really the only thing they have to their credit. Their RPI numbers aren’t bad, but they have zero wins over solid at-large teams (and one over bubble Seton Hall).
Compare them to LSU. LSU also has a couple of bad losses out of conference (USA, Coastal Carolina), and a couple of wins over fringe tournament teams (Mississippi State, Alabama). But – LSU beat Marquette. That would make LSU’s resume clearly better than South Florida’s, right?
Eamon … let me clarify. Conference records are considered but aren’t weighted to the point where a team is deemed worthy of at-large selection simply based on a certain number of league wins. It would be easy to look at USF’s Big East record and say – well that team should be in because they are 10-4 in the Big East. Not so. Plus, it’s hard to compare conference records across leagues. For example, a 9-9 record in this year’s Big Ten isn’t the same as 9-9 record in the Pac-12. That’s not because of conference names, it’s because the TEAMS in the Big Ten would likely be “better” wins this year. It should be noted that USF’s non-conference SOS ranks No. 45. By comparison, LSU’s ranks No. 205. That’s fairly big difference. Plus, the Bulls missed a key player or two early in the season. Those players have returned. USF is 14-10 vs. the Top 200 while LSU is 10-10. So LSU’s overall resume isn’t clearly better – although they have one better win (Marquette). Just know that the Committee will evaluate everything, including USF’s missing players. How important a team’s conference record is depends on the person. Every committee member has one vote. It takes a series of votes and rankings to put a team in the field.
USF’s OOC SOS is good, but their conference SOS is 102. Doesn’t that solidify the point that their 10-4 record simply isn’t all that impressive? It’s a case similar to Alabama’s last year, and Alabama even had wins over Kentucky and Tennessee last year. And, I’m not sure why the record vs. the Top 200 is all that important. Both of these teams should be able to beat teams with records from 100-200, and both have, with a few exceptions. But, LSU is 5-7 vs. the Top 100 while USF is 4-7. LSU is also 2-6 vs. the Top 50 vs. USF’s 1-6. LSU also actually has beaten a Top 25 (a Top 10 team, for that matter), unlike USF.
I don’t think either of these teams are in at this point in time, anyways. I just think USF is getting a bit too much credit for that Big East record, and LSU should be talked about at least a little bit, but everyone seems to be excluding them from any possibility.
That is the flaw, almost all of the major OOC Pac games were in the beginning of the year when several of the pac teams were adjusting to losing several players to the NBA…the Pac is significantly stronger now than it was in November.
Just curious why you, and alot of other pundits have Wichita St. seeded ahead of Temple- Both if your just going off the games already played and if your projecting the rest of their games and their conference tournaments?
(all my numbers are from CBS) RPI and SOS are nearly identical.
Temple does have those 2 terrible losses (144 and 157), but all but 1 of temple’s losses (Purdue, on a neutral court at the beginning of the season) was without their starting center. Temple also beat WSU head to head on a neutral court, albeit at the beginning of the year.
Temple is 3-0 against the rpi top 25. Shockers are 1-1.
Temple is 4-0 vs top 50. Shockers are 2-3.
Temple’s best win (#3 rpi) is much better than the Shockets best win (#12). Ditto for second best win (15 vs 28) and 3rd best win (22 vs 64) and so on…
And Temple has won 10 in a row while WSU has won 9 of 10 but that loss was to a 100+ rpi team.
The other thing is remaining games, as I assume most project Temple and WSU winning out: Temple has 4 games left, 3 are on the road and 3 are against the top 100 in rpi. WSU has 2 left, 1 home and 1 on road, both against teams above 100 in rpi. And if you look at their tournaments, as things stand now:
The MVC tourny will have only 4 of 10 teams ranking in the top 100, with two ranked 240 or worse.
The a-10 tourny will have 8 teams of 12 teams with rpi’s inside the top 100. And no teams outside the top 200.
If both teams win out, even if WSU had a better resume to this point, wouldnt temple move ahead of them because of the higher quality of teams they are playing, playing some on the road and some on neutral courts?
THanks in advance
(go temple!)
TUTuff … You obviously follow college hoops closely, and I appreciate your interest. You make several great points. While WSU was slightly ahead on my s-curve for Monday’s bracket, it was very close (Wichita St was No. 15, Temple No. 17). It just so happens that No. 17 falls on the 5-seed line. Two quick notes, Wichita State has lost just once in 2012 (3 OTs). Temple has lost twice. WSU non-conference SOS is slightly better. We’re really splitting hairs here. Both are good teams that could advance past the first weekend. Moving forward, if Temple were to win out, I would say, yes, they probably end up a little ahead of WSU. But a 4-seed might be the ceilling for both unless teams above them fall. Stay in touch.
Thanks for the response.
I dig the site. Your better than Joey Brackets AND interact with readers.
Thanks
“WSU has 2 left, 1 home and 1 on road, both against teams above 100 in rpi.” SHOULD READ: “WSU has 2 left, 1 home and 1 on road, both against teams OUTSIDE the top 100 in rpi”
At what point will the committee send Duke or North Carolina on the round for the first weekend? Yet another year with them having home games in Greensboro?
The Committee doesn’t just choose to send Duke or UNC to nearby locations. Because they are often ranked highly on the s-curve, the Blue Devils and Tar Heels have first dibs being placed close to home. As the bracket is filled out (s-curve order), those teams have preference over locations (in order). Currently, both Duke and UNC are currently in the Top 8 of the s-curve. No teams ranked above them would choose Greensboro over say Louisville (UK), Pittsburgh (Syracuse), Columbus (Michigan St), Omaha (Missouri), etc.
How important is final score compared to how the game was played?, if you have a team that battles back after being down 20 late are they rewarded for the effort, punished for getting down 20 in the first place or for the most part is final score the only thing that matters.
The Committee watches a lot of games .. they stressed this as the Mock Process. Overall, winning and losing counts more than the score. Teams can be given credit for playing well and losing close games – especially on the road. One reason why “scores” aren’t that critical is because there are often many variables to the final score – as you alluded. A team could hit two or three three pointers in the final minute and make a double-digit game appear much closer than it was.
No reason Arizona should be ahead of Oregon. Oregon has the win @ Zona and is 17 spots higher in the RPI.
Grant. The two are very close. Here’s why I give the overall edge to Arizona (despite the one-game head-to-head result) … Arizona is 6-8 vs. the Top 100 (Stanford at No. 100 today), while Oregon is 4-7 (two of those against No. 100 stanford). So that’s really a 5-7 vs. a 2-5 difference if you take out the Cardinal. Also, the Wildcats’ non-conference SOS ranks about 50 spots higher. Somewhat minor difference, but enough that I think the Committee would rank Arizona in front of the Ducks right now. Appreciate your interest.
Further, AZ has a series of “good losses”, moreso than Oregon and most other teams as noted in Kenpom.
How close are my Billikens to being a lock? @ Rhode Island, Xavier, and @ Duquesne to finish the regular season. Do they have to win them all to be considered a lock going into the conference tournament?
Good bracket. I agree with just about everything, and can’t pick anything out that I disagree with.
That three-loss skid really hurt Creighton’s chances for a high seed. No shot left at a 4, even beating WichitaSt in the Arch Madness final?
Dont like Texas over Northwestern
Horrible loss for SLU on Saturday. Obviously that won’t knock them out of the bracket, but what do they need to do to make sure they’re feeling safe on selection sunday? Beat Xavier and Duquense and win 1 in the conference tourney?
I don’t think this eliminates OSU from a #1 seed it makes it unlikley but if they won out including beating Michigan State twice it could still be possible and winning the Big 10 tournament.
It doesn’t eliminate them, however Duke and UNC will likely each need one more loss to prevent them from getting it instead. And it is very unlikely with how poor OSU has played since the end of december.
You’ve got three pods in Pittsburgh and just one in Greensboro–I’m assuming perhaps the UNC pod is supposed to be in Greensboro?
Yes, correct. I’ve fixed it. Thanks for your interest and for letting me know.
One thing I don’t understand is why they don’t take head to head matchups in consideration. Iowa State beat Kansas State twice this year and is a lower seed? Iowa State has proven they are a better team.
Fred, head-to-head matchups are considered, but they are just a part of each team’s overall profile. Last year, Colorado beat Kansas State three times and K-State made the NCAAs while Colorado did not – largely due to a No. 300-plus non-conference strength of schedule. Sometimes, results are match-up related. Quick comparison … Iowa State is 4-6 vs. Top 100 teams; Kansas State is 6-7. KSU’s best non-conference wins are Alabama and Long Beach. Iowa State’s best non-conference win is Lehigh (by RPI). Those are differences the committee has to take into account. Kansas State also has wins at Missouri and at Baylor. Iowa State’s biggest win (Kansas) was at home. Iowa State may have played better twice when it played KSU, but the Wildcats overall profile is still a slightly better. Hope that helps a little. Thanks for your interest!
Colorado State has an RPI of 22 and SOS of 4. Based on these numbers, they are a lock to get in. But take a look at their schedule and their awful losses (-23 Duke, -21 Southern Miss, -19 Wyoming, -32 New Mexico, -19 UNLV) and tell me how going 7-6 in the MWC and beating the likes of SMU, Texas Southern, Jacksonville State, and Nebraska-Omaha warrants an invite?? Your telling me they played a harder schedule than North Carolina (SOS 7)?
My point is that most bracket “experts” exclusively look at RPI and SOS to validate a team’s inclusion into the tourney. Thus, if a team has excellent RPI and SOS numbers (e.g., Colorado State), you can’t conveniently ignore those same stats to exclude them from the tournament. So why is CSU out? It can’t be their numbers or their conference record…because Connecticut is 7-10 in the Big East confernence, RPI 35, and SOS 2…and you have them a 9 seed, How does that work??
Brian, I don’t think anything is ignoring the strong computer numbers for Colorado State. Remember, though, the RPI is mostly as organizational tool. In years past, a team’s RPI number played a more critical role in its selection than it does today. The Selection Committee has progressed and scrubs through team resumes. Teams are much more than a number. On a side note … you will see that CSU is in our latest bracket update when its posted Friday morning. Quick notes … until the past two weeks, Colorado State had exactly one win over a Top 50 team (SDSU at home). Since, they have beaten New Mexico and UNLV. The win over UNLV was huge because it gave the Rams victories over all three teams at the top of the conference. Outside the MTW, CSU’s best wins are Colorado, Montana, and Denver. So while CSU played few really bad RPI teams, they didn’t win any non-conference games of NCAA-level quality – although any of those three could still win automatic bids. A 2-9 road record is also a concern as no team plays at home during the tournament. those are just a couple of quick thoughts. In games against Duke and Southern Miss, the Rams weren’t real close. Thanks for your interest. Hope CSU makes it!
Dave…thanks for the response. I am not a CSU fan, but a pure college basketball junkie. I think one variable that is often overlooked in these debates is margin of victory/loss. For instance, teams like Virginia and Clemson (especially) that play in the ACC have a LOT of close L’s. I mean, Clemson lost to 7 teams by a combined 20 points but beat FSU by 20 and thus, their RPI is a pathetic 142. I am pretty sure Clemson is better than CSU and Connecticut.
What would it take for UNC to get a #1 seed?
IMO, A win at duke is a must, Not duke winning the ACC tourny, OSU to beat MSU on Sun and a poor showing by both OSU and MSU in the B1G tourny.
Ohio State is 2nd rated team in KenPom ony behind Kentucky
http://kenpom.com/
All that says is that arguably based on statistics OSU is the 2nd best team in the country. Doesn’t matter as long as they don’t win games. Results wise they are about the 10th best team in the county
Proving my point today…Seton Hall gets beat by 28 to a RPI 200 team (following a loss to a RPI 155 Rutgers). But everyone still has them in the field “depending on what happens in the BE tourney”. Really?? Come on! Meanwhile, Miss State drubs Arkansas (RPI 100) by 20 and people are like “they need to win one game in New Orleans” if they want to get in. This system is a joke.
I suppose a 2 point OT loss to RPI 106 Georgia, a 2 point OT loss to RPI 83 LSU, and a 10 point loss to an RPI 145 Auburn are considerable worse than a 5 point loss to a RPI 155 Rutgers and a 28 point loss to a RPI 200 Depaul. Just saying.
You know how many wins St. Louis has vs. the Top 50 (Washington is going to drop)? Zero.
So, I guess the moral of the story is play a decent, though not difficult, schedule and a tournament bid is a lock. Play 12 games vs. the Top 50 and win two and you’re probably not going to make it.
Rodney … St. Louis is by no means a lock. That’s why they are on our bubble list. Keep in mind, the 0-2 mark vs. Top 50 is an issue, but SLU is 7-4 vs. Top 100 teams – a better record than many other bubble teams. A teams “projected seed” isn’t necessarily indicative of how close they are to the final group of at-large teams.
Coming from a SLU fan, I’ll say that the Billikens’ resume would probably not be tournament worthy or it would be very close in a normal year, but I’d say they’re pretty safe this year.
Wichita State dumped down to a 6, probably, with the loss. Creighton up a notch to a 5 if they win, or would Illinois State (a team they’ve already beaten twice) not help that much?
Also, is the win against Baylor enough to get IowaSt out of the 8/9 game?
Wichita could stay a 5; Creighton likely a 6. Depends on what else happens. Iowa State may need to win another game (or two) to get into the top half of the bracket – again depending on what happens around them. Landscape and seeding position is still fluid. Nothing happens in a vacuum. Very few spots are locked in except at the very top.
I said it a few weeks ago when everyone wrote Ohio State off I said wait until the rematch with Michigan State that they were not dead yet. Too bad for them they also choked a game at home to Wisconsin on the way or they would be right back in the #1 seed line. Right now they have to win the Big 10 tourney to have any chance at least this should lock up a #2 seed.
Why does UK, the overall #1, get the toughest 8/9 matchup BY FAR?
That’s just how it works, it still has nothing on the difficulty OSU had last year.
Brandon, thanks for you interest. Trying to catch up during a busy week. The Cincinnati-Memphis you mention is largely the result of bracketing principles and procedures. Nothing more. Of the 8-seed grouping (via the s-curve), Cincinnati was given first consideration. They could not be placed in the West or East due to conference conflicts. And Louisville is by far the closest pod. Had nothing to due with UK. Hope this helps.
Not sure how St. Joseph’s can be in while South Florida misses. The Hawks have some bad losses too, a lower RPI and a weaker strength of schedule.
Dan … incredibly tough calls. After scrubbing through all various factors considered by the committee, it came down to wins against non-conference opponents. In relation to St. Joe’s and South Florida, St. Joe’s had non-conference wins against tournament teams Temple at Creighton at the time of publication. They had also beaten CAA regular-season champ Drexel. So Florida’s best non-conference win was Cleveland State. As to “bad losses,” South Florida lost to ODU, Auburn and Penn State. St. Joe’s had losses Richmond, American and Charlotte. Roughly comparable. In terms of SOS, St. Joe’s overall schedule ranked No. 43 and its’ NC SOS as 39. South Florida’s numbers were 24 and 54. Thanks for your interest. Stay in touch.
Tennessee, VCU, St. Joes, and Seton Hall in over Northwestern!? Are you kidding me!
Northwestern is 1-10 vs. Top 100 RPI teams and 5-12 vs. the Top 100. I would love to see the Wildcats make the NCAAs. But I don’t think their profile is quite there yet. Hopefully, they will win a couple of games at the Big Ten tournament. Tennessee has beaten Florida (twice), Vanderbilt and Connecticut in the top 50. As I referenced with the bracket on Monday, the Volunteers are a different team with Jarnell Stokes – who joined the team in early January. That will be considered. Seton Hall and VCU were much closer calls. The Pirates were 4-7 against Top 50 teams and 7-8 vs the Top 100. VCU was more of a subjective evaluation and was helped by a 6-4 mark vs. Top 100 teams. Since the posting, VCU won the automatic bid, so they are no longer in the at-large pool.
I think that it is interesting that you placed Louisville as a seven seed. I think that their body of work more resembles that of a fringe five, high six, but lately, the “eye test” makes them look like an eight. I’ve always thought the eye test was more used to evaluate bubble teams. Two questions:
Would a Big East tournament win shift Louisville’s line at all?
Why would the line for the Cardinals drop so much? They lost to a desperate top-25 or 50 RPI team in USF and a sure-fire number one seed in Syracuse. I know that the offense for them is horrendous, but the body of work does not really suggest a seven.
Ethan .. thanks for your interest. To your questions: 1) Louisville will play either Providence or Seton Hall in its opening Big East tourney game. Neither team will provide a significant lift, but SHU would help more. The Cards could certainly regain some seeding ground the more they advance. 2) Sometimes, seed line placement looks to be bigger than it actually is. For example, the final 5-seed would be No. 20 on the s-curve. No. 25 would be the first 7 seed. So while there appears to be a big difference, it’s only a matter of five positions. The other reality is that within the Big East, Louisville has not beaten one team above them in the conference standings. Losing 3 of 4 games to close also allowed the Cardinals to be passed on the s-curve. Hope that makes sense. Nothing happens in a vacuum.
NC State is 0-8 vs. the Top 50, 5-9 vs. the Top 100, and has two bad losses to Clemson and Georgia Tech. Ole Miss is 1-6 vs. the Top 50, 6-11 vs. the Top 100, and only has one bad loss to Auburn. Neither team is making the tournament, but why is NC State occupying a spot on the bubble when there are more deserving teams who are outside of the bubble?
I still think Iona and Drexel deserve bids. I think the SOS is very flawed because a key element to that is rankings and how does anybody know that the rankings are right really. They both look like legit contenders and could easily win a few games in the tournament. Just think like usual the power conferences are getting to many. Have we not learned by now these mid majors can win and even get to the final four. This years so-called mid-majors are the best bunch of them yet. Would just like to see more get a chance. Whole season dominating conference and one bad game and out in own tourney. These conference tourneys are all about the almighty $$ anyhow. Its a shame these kids have to pay the price of a dream for that
Tim .. I would love to see both Drexel and Iona make it. Teams earn bids, not conferences. There are no set number of bids for any league, major or mid-major. Yes, the power leagues have certain advantages, but the Committee has been more more accommodating to so-called mid-majors in recent years. One a final note, conferences decide how they choose to hand out automatic bids, not the NCAA. Had the MAAC or CAA awarded auto bids to their regular-season champions, Iona and Drexel would be automatic qualifiers. The league chose to use the conference tournament. The Selection Committee’s job is to invite the 37 best at-large teams after the automatic qualifiers. It’s a tough and thankless job. Having sat through the Mock Process this year, I can tell you the people involved take their job seriously. Both Iona and Drexel will be thoroughly evaluated. Thanks for your interest!
Why does the committee still use the RPI, even as just an organizational tool? Why wouldn’t they use one of the many better options to give a more precise picture? Its like saying a carpenter takes their profession seriously but uses their own feet to measure instead of a tape measurer… why wouldn’t you use the best tools available?
I do think you do a terrific job of understanding the committee and how they make decisions.
I’ve read that you believe Northwestern needs to, at least, beat Minnesota and Michigan to make the tournament. Clearly, that is a reasonable estimation. That being said, how likely do you think it is that the committee would find the Minnesota win enough? Given Northwestern’s unique bubble profile (No bad losses, a win over a potential tournament champion, 8 losses against top 21 teams, but only 1 top 50 win), is there some modicum of hope?
Chad … the short answer is yes. Nothing happens in a vacuum. Let’s say NW beats Minnesota and loses another close game to Michigan. If the other bubble teams around NW also lose – or lose earlier – then the Wildcats may end up as one of the 37 best at-large teams available. It’s a fluid situation. What if a team like Ole Miss wins the SEC tournament? That likely takes a spot. We’ve seen those potential situations play out through mid-afternoon on Selection Sunday. So NW could be voted into the field as the 37th at-large team only to get bumped by a surprise automatic qualifier.
Where do you see St. Mary’s after the win on Monday night vs. Gonzaga? # 6 seed?
Possibly. I would think the 6-7 range depending on what happens elsehwere; 8 would the lowest, in my opinion.
Very nice job on the whole, Dave. Don’t agree with all of it, but I have a lot of respect for people who do these in their entirety (e.g. seeding, avoiding rematches in first two rounds, first round game location, etc.). I see that you still have Seton Hall as “in” at the moment. Do you think that they will be able to stay in your bracket come Selection Sunday? I honestly have high doubts about it. The losses to DePaul & Rutgers were fatal shots to the foot.
It’s going to be close, Greg. Depends on what happens around them. With Washington and Northwestern losing today, it helps. I would say odds are slightly less than 50-50 at the moment, but it’s a very fluid situation.
Hey Dave, been following you on Twitter and your web site for quite some time now and love the work you do.
I’m trying to understand how “protected” seeding and second/third round sight selection occurs and I may be confused.
In your bracket this morning (Thursday, march 8), I am assuming you have Kentucky and Syracuse as the top two seeds overall. In their regions you have Michigan and Indiana as the three seeds. So, that would mean the are the 9th and 10th seeds overall with Marquette also a 3 seed in the Midwest where Kansas is the 1 seed.
You have Indiana slotted to play it’s first two games in Nashville and Marquette in Louisville.
My question or source of confusion is shouldnt Indiana be slotted to play in Louisville as it is a closer site to Indiana than Nasville and would be available to them at the site selection gets to them as they appear to be higher in the 1-68 overall seeding process than Marquette as noted above?
Tom, thanks for your interest. Great question. Indiana is currently No. 12 on the s-curve – following Marquette (10) and Michigan (11). So Marquette actually gets the choice above IU – and Louisville is closer for Marquette as well. You are correct that Kentucky is No. 1 on the curve and Syracuse is No. 2. But this is where bracketing principles come into play. Marquette cannot be placed in the East Region because they are the second team from the Big East into the bracket. By rule, the first three teams from a conference have to be placed in separate regions. Here’s how it went: Baylor is 9 on the curve but could not go South because of Missouri or Midwest because of Kansas. The West is the next logical stop. Marquette is next. They cannot go East. Midwest is their next best fit. Plus, Indiana or Michigan can’t go West or Midwest because of Michigan State and Ohio State on the 2-line. Michigan as the next highest seed went South to balance the region. IU thus went East. Long story, hope it helps.
And who are you, the chairman of the committee?
Dave,
Thank you so much! Your explanation is perfect and helps so much!
Love your response to the “inexperienced bracketologist” comment, but I do have a bone to pick with you….Baylor seeded higher than IU? Come on now ;) (not sure if my IU bias is shining through clearly yet??? )
Seriously love the site and you taking the time to reply and explain socmamy things which clearly people do not. I was trying to explain to a buddy the other night at dinner ( whose a fairly knowledgeable college hoops fan) that seeding no longer dictates where you play your first two rounds at (in relation to the region you are bracketed in) as he was under the assumption that if a team was in the West Region they played in one of the West second-third round sites. Following your comments here and on twitter has infinitely helped me understand the whole selection, seeding and bracketing process. Thank you!
Doesn’t it seem unfair to give WKU, the team with the worst record, a chance to play in their home state against the 1 seed? WKU-UK played in Louisville isn’t really fair for UK, now is it?
Sam, the official rule is that a protected seed should not be placed at a home-court disadvantage in its first game (second round because of the First Four). For starters, WKU is in a play-in game, so there’s no guarantee they would even play Kentucky. Second, WKU would not in anyway have a home court advantage in Louisville – it will be heavily favored toward UK. Third, I doubt the Wildcats would/should feel threatened by Western Kentucky. I don’t know if this scenario will happen, but it certainly could. Thanks for your interest!
What does Memphis have to do to get off the 8/9 seed line?
I would say reach the C-USA final or win the conference tournament. Unfortunately for Memphis, the Tigers missed on most of their chances against Top 50 opponents (1-6 record). While they are 9-7 vs. the Top 100, the price they’ll pay most likely is a moderate seed. When playing well, Memphis could be a dangerous 7-9 seed, though. Just my opinion. Committee members could see it differently.
As of today, Arizona isn’t even on your considered list. Where do they stand? Do they have to win the Pac 12 auto-bid to get in the tourney? I’ve seen other brackets where they’re listed as about a 10 seed.
I think they might have to win it after the disasterous loss to Arizona State. Arizona at least has to reach the final. Too many overall profiles are superior, imo. What Arizona had to showcase at the time of the projection was a win over Cal and a win over WAC runner-up New Mexico State. UA’s RPI was 83 to start the day. We’ll see how the next two days go.
Washington better not make the tournament. What is the rationale for anyone having them in (I understand this hasn’t been updated yet but some still have them in even with their loss to Oregon State)? Put Drexel and Iona in ahead of them…
Eamon … My feeling is that IF Washington is selected it will be the result of having an outright Pac-12 title. We saw this happen last year with UAB, although the Blazers’ resume was slightly better (in my opinon – more Top 100 wins). If I were simply doing “my bracket,” Washington would fall short based on a variety of factors. But the task is trying to evaluate the landscape based on how the committee may vote. Those are two separate things. And this year, very difficult. I want the bracket to be as accurate as possible – and I have to take my “personal” hat off during the process.
Could you explain why you have Montana as a 15 seed? Just curious as to your reasoning. I think they are substantially better than Akron but I am biased.
S-curve update coming today. Montana is No. 59 right now, highest ranking 15-seed. In the case of Akron, the Zips have beaten 4 Top 100 teams; Montana has beaten 2. Montana beat Long Beach (home) and swept Weber State. Akron won at Mississippi State and at Marshall (both outside their league). Thanks for your interest! Hope that helps a little. Grizzlies will be a tough out either way. A 14 is still possible, depending on how the final conference tournaments play out.
Top 50 wins. I’m always hearing that stat quoted as though it’s the be all and end all. What I’d like is for someone to do a study on how much top 50 wins is a result of opportunity itself.
Every year, there are a couple of otherwise mediocre Big 6 schools that run up impressive top 50 wins stats. This year, Iowa has beaten Wisconsin twice, plus Michigan and Indiana. Actually, these are all top 25 teams.
Then, I hear someone like Jay Bilas say that bubble teams have all proven they can lose and they need to show us who they can beat. Here you go Jay, I give you the Iowa Hawkeyes.
How much of a team like Iowa’s success against top 25 teams is driven by them being really good vs. getting a lot of opportunity to play games like that and a significant number of them at home?
Actually, the home/road factor is pretty significant, yet it’s often ignored. A look at Sagarin’s predictor rankings and his home court advantage, based on every D1 game played this season, reveals that beating the #50 team at home is almost exactly the same as beating the #120 team on the road.
With this in mind, it’s obviously going to be a lot tougher for mid-majors, even really good ones, to rack up top 50 wins, when they typically have to play the majority of those games on the road or on a neutral floor. Does Indiana beat either Kentucky or Ohio State, if those games are played on a neutral floor? How does their resume look now? Instead of a three seed, they’re probably a six or seven seed.
Hello, Tennessee’s RPI is at 77, the highest RPI to ever make the at-large field is 74. The highest in the last ten years is 68 in 2002. RPI is a great barometer on at-large teams that make the field and the selection committee no longer looks at the last ten games but of all the games and Tennessee has some really bad loses. Why is Tennessee in?
I think RPI is a horrible metric. 75% of the metric is based on what other teams do rather than what you do. So if you play a bunch of really good teams and get beat in EVERY one (e.g., NC State)….your RPI is going to be high. A few years ago, the committee said type of scheduling would not get you in…you have to win a few of the these games if you are going to schedule them (especially OOC)
In fact, I beleive if NC State had lost every game on their schedule this year (even by 50 points each game because W/L margin doesn’t matter)…their RPI would be .417. You would think that would be last…but it isn’t..Ranked around 295/340. That is why the metric is fatally flawed.
No way NC State should get in unless they beat UNC tomorrow. Their best win is Texas on a neutral court. No other notable wins whatsoever!
Seriously, what’s the difference between South Florida and Northwestern? One has two top 50 wins to the other’s one, but that former school also has two bad losses.
I know it can’t be conference record or last ten, because the committee supposedly doesn’t look at those anymore.
I have been pouring over these resumes again and could you explain to me how Purdue is not on the bubble with 3 of their 5 quality wins coming against Northwestern (twice) and Iona not really looking that great. In fact, I think they will end up only 2 wins over teams expected to make the tourney (Temple and Michigan). That looks a lot like a bubble team to me instead of a “lock”.
How do you think the bubble will shake out? Especially Mississippi State.
Miss State is in? There have been on a downhill spiral and got destroyed by a crappy Georgia team. Tennessee on the other hand lost on a controversial call to an average ole miss team and they are out? Don’t even get me started on Drexel. I don’t care how “hot” they have been, they haven’t beaten anybody worth a crap.
I’ll tell you why Northwestern is no different than NC State or South Florida.
NW: 1-10 vs. the top 50, 4-2 vs. 51-100, no bad losses, SOS 12, RPI 57
USF: 2-9 vs, the top 50, 4-1 vs. 51-100, 3 bad losses, SOS 34, RPI 52
NCS: 1-8 vs. the top 50, 5-2 vs. 51-100, 2 bad losses, SOS 30, RPI 47
Remove the names and tell me that this group isn’t about even.
Rodney, don’t really disagree. Not sure any will make it. If all were even, NC State went further in conference tourney. Regardless of who is selected today, teams can’t complain, really. Every bubble team has more reasons to be excluded than accepted. There will some minor issue somewhere that makes a different. With lots of different opinions.
Wow…with the USCB loss, BYU only has one quality win (Gonzaga). They should be out!
Could easily happen. That kind of year.
You can’t only look at quality wins. You have to look at a team’s overall resume. Top 50 wins are important but not the only thing that’s important. Beating the #50 team at home is about the same as beating the #120 team on the road. It’s very myopic to only quote top 50 wins or “quality” wins when trying to determine where to seed teams or whiich bubble teams should receive a bid.
Todd. Believe me. The committee scrubs these teams to the point of exhaustion. I’ve tried to do the same. Ten people vote, all may have criteria more important to them, and all voting is private. The process works that way for a reason. If the committee as a whole holds true to form on non-conference SOS, that could be determining factor. We’ll all find out at 6:00 p.m. Thanks for your interest!
The one thing I have noticed the past 4-5 years on selection day is that the committee does not value conference tournament wins unless you win it. I think they select their teams before the conference tournaments start and should any “bid stealer” win unexpectedly, they start removing the bottom teams from their at-large list. Since NC State was out starting conference tournaments and they did not win the ACC tourney, I think they are out, along with Northwestern, Drexel, Iona, Miami, or Washington. I think the teams that need to worry are Seton Hall, South Florida, BYU and Xavier. I think Xavier needs to win today. I think Miss. State is likely in.
Brian … I tend to agree with the exception of Xavier. Beating Vanderbilt, Purdue and Cincinnati are tourney level wins, and given this weak bubble, are probably enough to keep XU above the cutline at this point. Especially because they were non-conference wins. All the A-10 tourney has done is not give the committee a reason to leave the Musketeers out.
Dave….I think Xavier is one of the last teams in at this point. But they may survive if there are a few teams closer to the at large cut.
If you compare Middle Tennessee to Drexel…MTSU has a stronger schedule and better wins, yet they are not in the discussion. I think Drexel is definitely out.
Brian, I have always kept looking at MTSU, and they have been listed with my under consideration teams. Those two bad back-to-back losses at the end of the season is what kills them. All very much alike.
The only reason to exclude Drexel is that it didn’t play a very good non-conference schedule. The committee hasn’t been very consistent, except that they seem to value teams on the bubble challenging themselves out of conference. That doomed Alabama and Colorado, last year. It could do the same to Drexel, this year, although I’m really rooting for them to get in. I’d love to see them play Washington in one of the Tuesday games.
Of the bubble teams, the win by Vandy today sure does help Miss. State.
The difference between Iona and Drexel is that Iona made an effort to play solid teams OOC (43 SOS OOC), while Drexel didn’t (223 SOS OOC). I think I’d have Iona ahead of Drexel.
who cares unless you win. NC State played a bunch of good teams and got blown out in most of them. this is a bad way to figure how good teams are!
Drexel over Miss State? Not sure about that! Resumes aren’t even close
Last four in: Xavier, South Florida, Mississippi State,and Seton Hall.
Last four out: NC State, BYU, Drexel, and Marshall
Horrible having Iona in over Drexel.
No, it’s not. Iona had an RPI better by 24 points, a better record vs. the Top 100, and an OOC SOS better by about 200 points. Iona deserved it.
the last three out were Oral Roberts, Drexel, and Miami. BYU, NC State, and Iona are horrible selections and the chair gave no good reason to include them other than they played (and lost) to some good OOC teams.
Drexel didn’t have any reason to be in over Iona other than the “eye test.” Give me one reason that they should have made the tournament over Iona, other than the fact that you obviously think they’re a better team.
Every team that didn’t make it had no one to blame but themselves.