2022 Bracketology Page

Full Bracket S-Curve

Posted on March 13, 2022

If I have time I will try to create a full bracket – but lets at least create the S-curve, so you have a seeding line. One note: I think the 7th and 8th spots to fill the 2 seeds are between Villanova, Tennessee, and Purdue. What is interesting is Villanova played both Tennessee and Purdue in the regular season. Villanova lost to Purdue and beat Tennessee. And so I think this is what is going to happen based on the Big 10 outcome. After Duke lost in the ACC championship, I think they simply have to fall to the 3 line.

The other 2 seeds are both from the SEC (Auburn and Kentucky). So, I think if Purdue loses, Villanova and Tennessee stay on the 2 line. But if Purdue wins, it gives the committee an excuse not to have 3 SEC teams on that line. So, Purdue will pass Tennessee (and maybe Villanova – but at that point, it doesn’t matter.

I did one quick look at my last 4 seeds of the locks and changed their order to make sure the appropriate teams from the top of the bubble came in. I noticed Alabama had a couple more Quad 1 wins, and I suspect LSU is going to get downgraded due to the firing of their coach.

One last piece. But since I am out of time, I quickly looked at the bucket. And knowing that SMU, Oklahoma and Miami FL are 2 of the last 3 teams for the final spots, I suspect that the power conference teams get these spots over SMU – so I unfortunately have to drop SMU.

Also, for purposes of tracking At Large picks, I am going to list Iowa and Memphis as the At Larges of the games at the moment – it is simpler at the moment.

1) Gonzaga (WCC)	2) Arizona (Pac 12)	3) Kansas (Big 12)	4) Baylor (AL 1)
5) Auburn (AL 2)	6) Kentucky (AL 3)	7) Villanova (Big East)	8) Tennessee (SEC)
9) Duke (AL 4)	10) Purdue (AL 14)	11) UCLA (AL 5)	12) Texas Tech (AL 6)
13) Wisconsin (AL 7)	14) Arkansas (AL 8)	15) Illinois (AL 9)	16) Houston (American)
17) St. Mary’s (AL 10)	18) Providence (AL 11)	19) Connecticut (AL 12)	20 Iowa (Big 10)
21) Texas (AL 13)	22) Murray St (OVC)	23) USC (AL 15)	24) North Carolina (AL 16)
25) Boise St (Mt West)	26) Alabama (AL 17)	27) Colorado St (AL 18)	28) Ohio St (AL 19)
29) LSU (AL 20)	30) TCU (AL 21)	31) Memphis (AL 22)	32) Creighton (AL 23)
33) Iowa St (AL 24)	34) Michigan St (AL 25)	35) Virginia Tech (ACC)	36) Loyola IL (MVC)
37) Michigan (AL 26)	38) San Diego St (AL 27)	39) San Francisco (AL 28)	40) Texas A&M (AL 29)
41) Marquette (AL 30)	42) Seton Hall (AL 31)	43) Davidson (AL 32)	44) Indiana (AL 33) / Notre Dame (AL 34)
45) Oklahoma (AL 35) / Miami FL (AL 36)	46) UAB (Conf USA)	47) Chattanooga (Southern)	48) New Mexico St (WAC)
49) Vermont (Am East)	50) South Dakota St (Summit)	51) Richmond (Atl 10)	52) Akron (MAC)
53) Colgate (Patriot)	54) St Peter’s (MAAC)	55) Montana St (Big Sky)	56) Jacksonville St (Atl Sun)
57) Longwood (Big South)	58) Delaware (Colonial)	59) Yale (Ivy)	60) CSU Fullerton (Big West)
61) Norfolk St (MEAC)	62) Georgia St (Sun Belt)	63) Wright St (Horizon) / Texas Southern (SWAC)	64) Bryant (NEC) / Texas A&M – CC (Southland)

So this means my First 4 out are: SMU, Rutgers, Wake Forest and Dayton

Next 4 out are: Xavier, Florida, Wyoming, BYU

OK – that is my bracket. There are two live games at the moment. I don’t think Memphis can jump enough teams to move up a line (and they are down 15 at the moment). The Iowa / Purdue game is tight. I have my contingency if Purdue wins, but Iowa probably deserves a contingency as well. I suspect they will swap with Texas if they win.

Consolidate the Bubble List

Posted on March 13, 2022

I might not have time to take one final look at the bubble – we will at least consolidate the S-list, and then we will readdress the bubble if there is time. Most likely the Group A and B teams will be better.

GROUP A	GROUP B	GROUP C	GROUP D
Boise St (1)	TCU (2)	Davidson (15)	Miami FL (20)
Memphis (3)	Creighton (4)	Notre Dame (17)	Rutgers (21)
Michigan St (6)	Iowa St (5)	SMU (18)	Dayton (23)
Virginia Tech (7)	Texas A&M (12)	Wake Forest (22)	Florida (25)
Loyola IL (8)	Marquette (13)	Xavier (24)	VCU (29)
Michigan (9)	Seton Hall (14)	Wyoming (26)	Virginia (30)
San Diego St (10)	Indiana (16)	UAB (27)	Oregon (31)
San Francisco (11)	Oklahoma (19)	BYU (28)	Santa Clara (32)

Bubble Group A

Posted on March 13, 2022

This group has a lot of the top mid-majors, so it might be harder to judge. But we will try. We got San Francisco, Loyola IL, San Diego St, Boise St, Virginia Tech, Memphis, Michigan and Michigan St.

§ Boise St (26-7, NET 29) – BSU went 6-3 against Quad 1 (but they are all non-power conference teams). They have the 3 wins against San Diego St to go along with wins against Wyoming, @Utah St, and @Fresno St. They also won their games against power-conference schools Washington St and Ole Miss (not huge wins but they count). They have a head-scratching loss to CSU Bakersfield, but in the end – they won the Mt West regular season and conference tournament, which probably puts them above the other MW schools (including Colorado St).

§ Memphis (21-9, NET 31) – They went 5-3 against Quad 1 – they swept Houston, beat VT, Alabama, and SMU. They have 2 bad losses against Georgia and East Carolina, but they seemed to play their best when going against their toughest competition and are playing today to make the bubble conversation mute.

§ Michigan St (22-12, NET 36) – They went 5-9 against Quad 1 – they beat Purdue, UConn, Loyola, and swept Wisconsin. They also had some bubble Quad 2 wins against Michigan and Indiana. They have one bad Quad 3 loss against Northwestern. Right now, I feel like they should be ahead of a team like VT that still only has 3 Quad 1 wins, but behind a team like Memphis that got their 5 Quad 1 victories against less teams.

§ Virginia Tech (23-12, NET 27) – Before the ACC tournament, they were 1-5 against Quad 1 teams (a victory @Miami FL). They had losses to bubble teams Xavier, Dayton and Memphis. And then they went and beat Duke and UNC to win the ACC Tournament. They did beat Notre Dame twice in Quad 2, but also had Quad 3 losses against NC State and @Boston College. But they have a NET ranking that looks like a team that is a lock for the tournament. Guess it is a moot point, since they are a lock – they won the ACC bid. But I have no clue where to seed them.

§ Loyola IL (24-7, NET 23) – Loyola went 3-2 against Quad 1 – with a 9 point loss to Auburn and a 2 point loss to Michigan St. They did beat San Francisco, @Vanderbilt, @Missouri St. They also had Quad 2 wins against Arizona St and @DePaul. Had a Quad 3 loss to Drake – basically the typical profile of a top non-power conference team. Not sure if they would have still been in with a loss in the MVC tournament, but they won – which helps their profile.

§ Michigan (17-14, NET 34) – The Wolverines went 5-10 against Quad 1 – their wins were Purdue, @Iowa, San Diego St, @Ohio St, and @Indiana. They also have notable Quad 2 wins against Michigan St and UNLV. Basically, they simply have lots of games against tough teams, and a lot of losses to go with it. They have one bad loss to Minnesota but considering how dominant they were against SD St and UNLV, I have to put them ahead of SD St.

§ San Diego St (23-8, NET 25) – They went 5-8 against Quad 1 – They had wins against St. Mary’s, 2 against Colorado St, @Wyoming, and @Fresno St. This is both good and bad. This means they went 18-0 against everyone but the best (including a win against Arizona St). But they also had losses against other tourney and bubble teams like @Michigan, @USC, and @BYU. The Michigan and USC losses were double digits – everyone has a bad game from time to time, but it is hard to judge a team when these are the games we can more easily compare with.

§ San Francisco (22-9, NET 22) – They went 4-6 against Quad 1 – with 5 losses to Gonzaga and St. Mary’s, a loss to Loyola, and wins over Davidson, UAB, @BYU, and Santa Clara. They only have one bad Quad 4 loss to Portland. They only got 1 power conference opponent, but they did win that @Arizona St for a Quad 2 road win.

Bubble Group B

Posted on March 13, 2022

In this group, we have Seton Hall, Indiana, Marquette, TCU, Iowa St, Texas A&M, Creighton and Oklahoma. Here we go!

§ TCU (20-12, NET 44) – TCU went 7-8 in Quad 1 games – as playing in the Big 12 is brutal. They have Quad 1 wins against Kansas, Texas Tech, Texas, LSU, @Oklahoma, @Iowa St and @Kansas St. They also have no bad Quad 3 or 4 losses.

§ Creighton (22-10, NET 54) – Creighton went 7-5 in Quad 1 games (Villanova, @UConn, UConn, Providence, Marquette, @Marquette, and @St. John’s). They do have a bad loss to Arizona St, but they have managed to figure out how to replace one of their leading scorers to a season-ending injury, as they came just a couple of shots away from winning the Big East tournament championship against Villanova. I think TCU looks a little better simply from watching the games, but Creighton boosted their profile this week with their tournament.

§ Iowa St (20-12, NET 47) – They went 9-8 in Quad 1 games (Texas Tech, Iowa, Texas, Memphis, Xavier, @TCU, @Oklahoma St, @Creighton, and @Kansas St). They also have no bad Quad 3 or 4 losses. I am going to give TCU the edge here because they won 2 more Big 12 games than the Cyclones, so while Iowa St had 2 more Quad 1 wins, TCU did better in the Quad 2 games.

§ Texas A&M (21-11, NET 51) – This would be a different picture before this week. The Aggies were 2-9 in Quad 1 games with only a non-conference win over Wisconsin and a conference win over Arkansas. They also went 4-0 in Quad 2 games (including wins against Notre Dame and Florida). They also had a couple bad Quad 3 losses to South Carolina and Missouri. Then, they went on a tear in the SEC tournament – beating Florida, Auburn, and Arkansas – and now they are one win away from the SEC auto-bid. If they don’t win, I think the SEC tournament puts them above Marquette and Seton Hall, but not TCU (who beat Texas A&M), Iowa St and Creighton

§ Marquette (19-12, NET 41) – Marquette went 5-7 in Quad 1 – in which they swept Villanova, beat Illinois, and won on the road at Seton Hall and Kansas St. They also have the home wins against Seton Hall and Providence. They have no bad losses against Quad 3 or 4 teams – I put them slightly above Seton Hall because their wins were slightly better and of course, Marquette swept Seton Hall. Head to head isn’t always proof a team should be higher, but when they are close, I am going to use it as the deciding factor.

§ Seton Hall (20-10, NET 37) – Seton Hall went 6-7 in Quad 1 (wins against Texas, UConn, @Michigan, @Xavier, @Creighton, and @St. John’s. They also have no bad losses against Quad 3 or 4 teams.

§ Indiana (20-12, NET 38) – They only went 4-7 in Quad 1 (wins against Purdue, Illinois, Ohio St, and Michigan). The wins against Illinois and Michigan were in the Big 10 tournament, which is keeping them in the conversation. They also have a win over fellow bubble team Notre Dame. Technically, they have 1 Quad 3 loss – but that is the home game against Rutgers, which I consider slightly differently right now.

§ Oklahoma (18-15, NET 39) – This would be one of the worst records in at-large history. But 12 of those losses are from Quad 1 teams. Going 4-12 against Quad 1 (they did beat Baylor, Texas Tech, Arkansas, and @Kansas St. They also have a bubble win over Iowa St and Florida. And while no one is going to say a team doesn’t deserve to make it because they lost 9 games to Baylor, Kansas, Texas Tech, Texas and Auburn, the 15 losses will probably put them close to the end of the at-large list.

Bubble Group C

Posted on March 13, 2022

In this group, we rate Xavier, SMU, Davidson, Wake Forest, Wyoming, UAB, Notre Dame and BYU.

§ Davidson (25-5 NET 43) – Davidson is in a similar boat with SMU. They have a huge win over Alabama, a close loss to San Francisco, and a win @VCU. They have one bad loss @Rhode Island. I am going to give Davidson the nod over SMU because at the end of the day, they did win their conference, and they are playing in their conference championship.

§ Notre Dame (21-10, NET 52) – The Irish went 2-7 against Quad 1 teams (they did win @Kentucky and @Miami FL). They also have a home victory against UNC. They managed to tie for 2nd in the ACC by simply not losing to anyone but the top teams. They went 17-1 against Quads 3 and 4 (only losing to Boston College). At the end of the day, they finished 2 games above Wake Forest in the ACC which puts them slightly ahead of the Demon Deacons. I think I have to also put them over SMU – they have one less bad loss and the win against Kentucky will be viewed as better. Not to mention, fair or not, finishing tied for 2nd in the ACC will get viewed more favorable than being runner-up in the American.

§ SMU (21-7, NET 41) – SMU only had 4 Quad 1 games – but they won two of them (Houston and @Memphis). They also beat Memphis, Dayton and @Vanderbilt. They have a couple bad losses (overtime @Missouri and LMU), but for the most part, this is a team that has beaten the teams it was supposed to beat. It would have been big to get to the American final, but Memphis won 70-63 to make Sunday uncomfortable.

§ Wake Forest (23-9, NET 46) – they had more chances to get a Quad 1 win since they play in the ACC, and at the end, they only went 1-4 (winning @VT). They also have home victories against UNC and Notre Dame. They have two Quad 3 losses (@ Louisville and Boston College – but that was when everyone was watching in the ACC tourney). I have them above a team like Xavier because they won more of the games they were supposed to win. But they really could have used a few more wins against the top teams in the ACC.

§ Xavier (18-13, NET 40) – I think recency bias makes it hard to rank Xavier. The team that started 16-5 deserves to be in the tournament. The team that has lost 8 of its last 10 games does not. They have 5 quad 1 wins (UConn, Ohio St, VT, @Okla St, and @Creighton). They only have 2 bad losses (DePaul and the Big East tournament opener against Butler). But that is the problem. The losing streak at the end of the season put them in 8th in the Big East and then they lost to the 9th place team.

§ Wyoming (24-8, NET 48) – They have 4 Quad 1 wins – but all of them are in the Mountain West (Colorado St, Boise St, @Utah St, @Fresno St) – they also have 2 Quad 3 losses to Stanford and @New Mexico. While maybe unfair, the one chance they got to play the truly elite, they lost to Arizona by 29 points.

§ UAB (24-7, NET 49) – they lost a close game to San Francisco, and won on the road at North Texas and St. Louis. They have 3 Quad 3 losses (@West Virginia, @Old Dominion, and @Rice) and 1 Quad 4 loss (@Marshall). So, I think they have a relatively similar profile to Wyoming. I rank them slightly lower because Wyoming won a couple more games against tougher competition.

§ BYU (20-10, NET 53) – they have 4 Quad 1 wins – but like Wyoming, none are against the power conferences (not to say that wins against St. Mary’s, @ San Francisco, San Diego St and @Missouri St are great wins – but they are unfortunately viewed differently). They have one bad loss @Pacific, but the thing that ends up killing them the most is they placed 5th in the West Coast Conference. The West Coast Conference was really good this year, but I can’t see 5 teams making it. Their profile might be slightly better than Santa Clara’s because of the non-conference games, but it still doesn’t help that Santa Clara finished ahead of them in the conference standings.

Bubble Group D

Posted on March 13, 2022

It is easier to compare 8 teams than 32 – and that matches more of how the committee process works, where they bring teams in small groups. We have 32 teams between the Definitely and Questionable bubble first looks, so lets keep breaking down these teams. I probably shouldn’t, but we will go backwards. And will group based on which group they were in and NET ranking. So, in Bubble Group D, we have Dayton, VCU, Florida, Miami FL, Santa Clara, Oregon, Rutgers and Virginia

§ Miami FL (23-10, NET 63) – Miami has one more Quad 1 win than Dayton (@Duke, @VT, @Wake Forest, and North Texas. They also have had similar success in Quad 2 – including victories against North Carolina and Wake Forest. They did lose the head to head against Dayton, and they have 3 Quad 3 losses (Virginia, UCF, and Florida St). But I suspect that even with it being a down year for the ACC, being 4th in the ACC will rank slightly ahead of being tied for 2nd in the Atlantic 10.

§ Rutgers (18-13, NET 78) – They have 6 victories against Quad 1 – which is shocking for a team with a NET in the 70s. They have beat Purdue, Iowa, Illinois, @Wisconsin, Ohio St and @Indiana. But they are terribly inconsistent – including losses to Maryland, @Massachusetts, and Lafayette. I suspect they are ahead of Dayton who also had some bad losses, but behind Miami who also had some strong wins.

§ Dayton (23-9, NET 54) – Dayton had some huge wins in non-conference – they beat Kansas by 1 and Virginia Tech by 5. They split against fellow bubble team VCU – and both lost to Richmond in the A10 tournament, but Dayton was closer to getting to the final. Dayton also has some good home wins against Davidson, Miami FL, and St. Louis. They also have 1 Quad 3 loss (@ LaSalle) and 3 Quad 4 losses (UMass-Lowell, Lipscomb, and Austin Peay) to start the season.

§ Florida (19-13, NET 58) – They went 3-9 against Quad 1 teams – winning against Auburn, Ohio State and @ Vanderbilt. They also beat Oklahoma St at home, and Mississippi St and @ South Carolina. They only have one Quad 4 loss – but it is against a Texas Southern team that won their conference bid. Still, unlike the A10 teams, they got lots of chances to beat a top team, and they didn’t take advantage of them.

§ VCU (21-9, NET 56) – They only have one bad loss – a quad 3 vs. Wagner. They played Baylor close – losing by 8. And they beat @Davidson, @Dayton, and @Vanderbilt. But that still puts them one game behind Dayton in the conference standings, and they simply don’t have the same huge victories.

§ Virginia (19-13, NET 81) – They have more good victories than some on this group. They won @Duke, VT, Providence, and swept Miami FL. So, why are the Hurricanes ranked higher. Because despite the 2 victories against the Hurricanes, they finished 2 games behind them in the standings. They just had too many bad losses (Clemson, Florida St, @NC State, @James Madison, and Navy).

§ Oregon (18-14, NET 76) – They get on here instead of Colorado because they have a few more Quad 1 wins – they swept UCLA, won @USC, and @Colorado. But they also are hindered by the fact that Colorado had a better record in the Pac 12. At the end of the day, they lost 7 of their last 10 games, so the Pac 12 tournament loss to Colorado pushes them low on this list.

§ Santa Clara (21-11, NET 67) – They have a victory against St Mary’s, TCU and BYU. But that is 3-8 against the Top 2 Quadrants. They also have 3 Quad 3 losses (La Tech, UC-Irvine, and @Cal).

Bubble Analysis

Posted on March 13, 2022

I don’t know the best way to do this. The selection committee has a ballot and then they take a consensus. I don’t know that I have the time to do that. But lets at least start it. We already have our locks – so lets start looking at the next ranked teams by NET. Note: A few of these teams have won their conference tournament – but we don’t want to lose track of their ranking.

I am going to create 3 lists – Definitely Consider / Questionable / Likely Out – not going to try to rank – just group. I still need 21 teams – and it takes too long to put one team into the field at a time. I might still do that, but want a cleaner look in case I run out of time. There will be a few teams in here in the likely out that have won their Auto Bid – a few of them are likely to be 12 or 13 seeds – this simply means they would not break into the at-large population.

Typically, if a team is likely out, they either have 15 or more losses (15 is the most losses an at large has had, where the worst ever record was 2 games over .500) or they haven’t beaten any teams I consider tournament worthy. I stopped at 82nd with New Mexico St, since I can’t see the committee really considering anyone else at that point for an at-large bid. So, this leaves me with 15 teams that I think are in for sure, and 17 more teams to consider. It is possible that there might be some shuffling between those 2 groups, but this at least narrow the field. Then, we can have some more detailed posts about each group of teams.

DEFINITELY	QUESTIONABLE	LIKELY OUT
22) San Francisco	39) Oklahoma	46) North Texas
23) Loyola IL (AB)	40) Xavier	50) Oklahoma St
24) San Diego St	42) SMU	57) Mississippi St
29) Boise St (AB)	43) Davidson	59) Vermont (AB)
30) Virginia Tech (AB)	45) Wake Forest	60) St. Louis
31) Memphis	48) Wyoming	61) Utah St
34) Michigan	49) UAB (AB)	62) Washington St
36) Michigan St	52) Notre Dame	64) Chattanooga (AB)
37) Seton Hall	53) BYU	65) South Dakota St (AB)
38) Indiana	54) Dayton	66) Vanderbilt
41) Marquette	56) VCU	68) Missouri St
44) TCU	58) Florida	69) St. John’s
47) Iowa St	63) Miami FL	70) Colorado
51) Texas A&M	67) Santa Clara	71) Belmont
55) Creighton	76) Oregon (not sure where to put them)	72) Towson
	78) Rutgers	73) Fresno St
	81) Virginia (not sure as well)	74) Kansas St
		77) West Virginia
		79) Furman
		80) Drake
		82) New Mexico St

Ranking the Locks

Posted on March 12, 2022

This will actually feel lazy to me, but I am going to do it anyways. I am never good at seeding teams. I am down-right awful at it. My current analysis is that I do two mistakes.

The first mistake is I spend so much time analyzing the bubble, that I then rush through creating the seeding on Sunday afternoon. Considering I haven’t even ranked how teams are in the conference, I might be making this mistake again

The second mistake is that I over-analyze things. I start looking at Quadrant 1 wins and different rankings, and who beat who – and lose track of the reality. There is something out there that tells us a ton about the seeds. The AP and Coaches Poll.

The committee told us a lot when they made their initial Top 16 reveal a few weeks ago. If you look at the committee’s seeds, and how the AP Poll would have seeded the teams, 10 of the 16 teams would have been in the same place. The committee might have viewed Villanova as the 9th best team instead of the 10th, but that still makes them a 3 seed. Everyone but Providence was within 1 seed of where the AP Poll had them. Providence is an interesting case where they were 8th in the polls and 27th in the NET ranking. So, it looks like the committee split the difference and ranked them as a 4 seed.

There were a couple other teams that moved a lot – Tennessee jumped up 5 spots in the S curve (which only moved them from a 4 seed to a 3 seed). That probably has to do with the fact that the Vols had beat Kentucky that week in between when the polls came out and when they announced their top 16. Houston slipped from 14th in AP and 4th in the NET rankings to out of the top 16 – probably due to having no Quad 1 wins (not sure how they got so high in the NET without a big victory). And Texas moved up from 20th in the polls to 16th in the S Curve – I am not sure I have a good story for that – they won against Oklahoma, but a lot of the teams around them also won their games. I guess the committee needs to keep their mysteries.

But this all makes sense. The AP Poll is a compilation of how 61 people would rank the teams. So, why would it be surprising if I get 10 selection committee members in a room and have them rank the teams, they come up with something that looks almost exactly like the ranking the 61 AP voters came up with.

So lets set up an initial S-curve using a couple of thoughts – the AP Poll gives us the starting point. Then, we will account for a couple things. What happened in the Conference Tournament. When a team loses during the week, they normally drop a couple spots in next week’s poll – why wouldn’t this be different. Also, we will have our NET/Poll disagreement.

You might ask about the Coaches Poll – well, lets make a couple of notes. Because in almost all cases, the AP poll and Coaches Poll agree. Here are the differences

§ Tennessee and Providence (AP has Tennessee tied for 9th with Purdue with Providence at 11th – Coaches have Providence at 10th and Tennessee at 11th)

§ Arkansas and Illinois (switch between 15th and 16th – AP likes Arkansas, Coaches like Illinois)

§ Iowa and Colorado St (switch between 23rd and 24th – AP likes Colorado St, Coaches like Iowa)

§ 25th space (AP has North Carolina, Coaches has Ohio State)

OK – so lets look at the locks – these are the 26 teams the two polls have in the top 25, along with LSU (NET 18th) and Alabama (28th). Technically, Virginia Tech meets the lock requirement with a NET 30 at the moment. But finishing 7th in the ACC without likely 7 teams making it from the ACC, I am not ready to lock them this yet. I suspect San Francisco (NET 22nd), San Diego St (NET 24th), and Boise St (NET 29th) are in as well. But as St. Mary’s from the WCC and Colorado State from the Mountain West can tell you from past history of being snubbed, non-power conferences do not always get the same benefit of being in the Top 30 of the computer ranking. So, we will rank the 28 locks (and any auto-bid who is in the polls).

I might re-look at this on Sunday and switch teams around (there are still a few more games to be played). But lets at least have a starting point. One more note – some teams are still playing. A lost might switch some orders back (which will become more obvious as we look in the rankings: So – that it is easier to track. We will highlight teams that have won their conference tournament in Blue and teams that have no more games in Red.

1. Gonzaga (AP 1 / NET 1) – Top team going in, beat San Francisco and St. Mary’s to win the WCC auto-bid. They stay the National Top Seed

2. Arizona (AP 2 / NET 2) – The Wildcats beat UCLA 84-76 to win the Pac 12 championship and lock up the 2nd spot and guaranteeing a spot on the top of a region.

3. Kansas (AP 6 / NET 7) – The Jayhawks won the Big 12 championship against Texas Tech in a competitive game. Winning a share of the regular season as well as the conference tournament

4. Baylor (AP 3 / NET 5) – Their shocking quarterfinal loss to Oklahoma drops them a couple spots if Kentucky and Kansas keep winning. The other teams losing has probably locked in Baylor as the last of the 4 top seeds. They were ahead of Auburn going into the week, and I don’t feel any of the remaining teams can jump both Baylor and Auburn. We tend to remember what happened in conference tourneys, but you can not forget this was the 3rd best team over the regular season.

5. Auburn (AP 4 / NET 12) – The Tigers quarterfinal loss to Texas A&M also drops them down a couple spots. I suspect because the NET doesn’t agree with their AP ranking and that they have lost 3 of their last 6 will keep them stuck in the 2 seeds (which is certainly not bad)

6. Kentucky (AP 5 / NET 4) – These Wildcats move up thanks to them still playing in the SEC tournament while Auburn and Baylor shockingly lost in their quarterfinals. They briefly jumped up to the top line, but losing in the SEC semi-finals to Tennessee ended that opportunity. I can’t put them in front of Auburn – Auburn started the week ahead, and was 1 game ahead in the regular season standings.

7. Villanova (AP 8 / NET 6) – Villanova beat Creighton in the Big East title game 54-48. Quite honestly, the game didn’t look that impressive with players missing open shots. For right now, since they have title in hand, and Tennessee and Purdue still need to win tomorrow, I am going to leave them here. But I think either the Vols or Boilers will move up if they win tomorrow.

8. Duke (AP 7 / NET 11) – I am wondering if the pressure of winning for Coach K is too much for the Blue Devils. I did not expect the Hokies to beat Duke by 15 points. I think that loss means that Villanova jumps the Blue Devils. While Villanova had some offensive woes in their game, they still won. I think that Duke is now at risk of being jumped by the Vols and/or Boilers on Sunday.

9. Tennessee (AP 9T / NET 8) – Tennessee jumped the Boilers with their impressive victory against Kentucky. Beating the 5th ranked team in the country 69-62 was a much bigger win than some of the other teams around them achieved. Here’s the interesting question – if they win on Sunday, would the committee give the SEC 3 of the 4 #2 seeds. I am not sure how to answer that question.

10. Purdue (AP 9T / NET 13) – I originally had the Boilers ahead of Tennessee, but beating Kentucky is a lot more impressive than beating Michigan State. Sunday’s games will matter a lot on how these two teams rank.

11. UCLA (AP 13 / NET 11) – The Bruins have been playing well with a Pac 12 semi-final win over USC, and they battled close for most of the game with Arizona before the Wildcats pulled away for a 6 point win. I think UCLA still wrapped up a 3 seed.

12. Texas Tech (AP 14 / NET 9) – Texas Tech also has a chance to make a real statement tonight in their final against Kansas. They have done well this week crushing Iowa State and sneaking past Oklahoma to make the Big 12 final.

13. Wisconsin (AP 12 / NET 25) – The Badgers looked like they might be a 2 seed when they beat Purdue to win a share of the Big 10 title. Then, they unexpectedly lost to Nebraska to let Illinois come in and become co-champs. Then, the Badgers got upset in the quarterfinals by 6 against Michigan State. I believe the last 2 losses are going to put them on the 4 line.

14. Arkansas (AP 15 / NET 20) – They looked good in the SEC quarters to beat LSU by 12. They did not look as good getting blown out by 18 to Texas A&M in the SEC semi-finals. But the other teams around them are losing as well – so they stay put.

15. Illinois (AP 16 / NET 15) – Winning a share of the Big 10 title could have pushed this team further – but getting upset by Indiana by 2 in the quarters has probably put them on the 4 line.

16. Houston (AP 18 / NET 3) – OK – I think I now know the secret of why Texas jumped 4 spots. Non power conference teams that do well but have no big victories tend to be 5th and 6th seeds. But the problem is all the upcoming teams fall into either the non-power conference or power conference team that lost. If Houston wins the American, I feel this is their spot to lose.

17. St. Mary’s (AP 17 / NET 19) – I might need to really think about this. But for right now, I am going to stick with the ranking list. They got to 17th by knocking off #1 Gonzaga. Losing to Gonzaga in the WCC final is nothing to be ashamed of, but not sure it gets them to the 4 line.

18. Providence (AP 11 / NET 33) – I don’t know what to do with the Fryars. They fell 7 spots when the committee did their initial ranking, and while I want to punish them more for their 27 point loss in the Big East semi-finals to Creighton, the next team probably places the Fryars here.

19. Connecticut (AP 20 / NET 17) – UConn fought for 40 minutes and fell just short against Villanova in the Big East semi-finals. No shame in that performance – and it probably has earned them a 5 seed.

20. Texas (AP 22 / NET 16) – Texas had a tough quarterfinal matchup against TCU – where they lost by 5 points. Based on what is going on around them, I suspect that considering they were in the committee’s Top 16 reveal, they don’t fall past the 5 line.

21. Iowa (AP 24 / NET 14) – The Hawkeyes are continuing to move up the rankings thanks to their 10 point quarter-final victory over Rutgers and their buzzer-beater semi-final victory against Indiana. They might be able to move up another line if they can win the Big 10 tournament tomorrow (although they have a better chance to do that if their opponent is Purdue – it helps to beat teams ahead of you in the standings)

22. Murray State (AP 19 / NET 21) – Murray State won the OVC championship – unfortunately, that probably doesn’t change much in their seeding. This seems like the right reward for a team that went 30-2 but did it against other non-power conference teams.

23. USC (AP 21 / NET 35) – The NET doesn’t agree, but I don’t see any reason for USC to fall farther than this. They did exactly what was expected – beating Washington in the quarterfinals and losing to UCLA in the semifinals.

24. North Carolina (AP 25 / NET 32) – It would have been so awesome to see one last UNC/Duke game, but the Hokies ruined the storybook ending with their upset victory in the ACC semi-finals.

25. Colorado State (AP 23 / NET 27) – This might be the part of the rankings that gets passed by other teams in the bubble. But I do think they are in better place than the other 3 locks. They needed to win the Mt West tournament to stay as high as a 6 seed, but lost in a close semi-final to San Diego State. Not a bad loss – just not going to keep them in the top 6 seeds.

26. LSU (NET 18) – Beat Missouri before losing to a really good Arkansas team in the SEC quarter-finals. Wonder if the news about the head coach Will Wade being fired effects their seeding

27. Ohio State (Coaches 25 / NET 26) – Getting upset by Penn State 71-68 in the second round of the Big Ten tourney did not leave the best picture in the eyes of the committee. Upsets happen, but the Buckeyes have lost 4 of their last 5.

28. Alabama (NET 28) – Losing early in the SEC tournament with a 82-76 upset by Vanderbilt means the Tide are also going in the wrong direction – having lost 4 of their last 6. This just doesn’t look like the same team that beat Baylor and Gonzaga earlier this season.

So that is our starting point. 7 lines are created. Once we identify the rest of the bubble teams, we can readdress. Also, considering Tennessee is beating Kentucky by 10 points, I am sure these will update – I might choose to simply update this post instead of having lots of extra posts.

Tracking the Conferences and Defining the Bubble

Posted on March 10, 2022

Since I am pretty behind in my bracketology ramblings, lets create a post that will track the conference tournaments while also define the bubble.

At this point, we will be a little over-inclusive and a little conservative. We need to determine which teams are already locks and which teams are out. While I think it has happened a couple times, typically any team that is in the Top 25 of the last poll going into Champs Week makes the tournament. Also, everyone who is in the Top 20 of the NET regardless of conference, and Top 30 of the NET from the Power Conferences ends up dancing. So, those two criterias will create our locks.

On the other side of the spectrum, the worst computer ranked team to ever make it as an at-large team (to my memory) is 74th New Mexico in 1999. There is always a chance that history is made, but I can’t see it going past 80th in the NET rankings. So, we will keep an eye on everyone in the Top 80. That being said, that creates a pretty big bubble. So, we will split things between true bubble and long shots. Anyone with a NET ranking over 60 will be in the long shots. Anyone with a 500 record or less will be in the long shots. And anyone who has no Quadrant 1 wins will be in the long shots.

If your team is in the long shots, don’t give up hope. Every year, a couple of long shots make it. But it helps if you win a couple of games in the upcoming days….

If you assume the auto-bids come from teams that are locks, it leaves 21 spots for the teams in the Bubble and Long Shots. As I get more time, I will continue to break down the potential multi-bid conferences. Or I will run out of time and randomly pick 21 teams. Likely something in between…..

CONFERENCE	DATE	AUTO-BID	LOCKS	BUBBLE	LONG SHOTS
OVC	3/5	Murray St (19th AP)			Belmont (70)
Big South	3/6	Longwood (123)
MVC	3/6	Loyola IL (25 NET)			Missouri St (68)
Sun Belt	3/7	Georgia St (168)
Southern	3/7	Chattanooga (61)			Furman (80 – No Q1)
Atlantic Sun	3/8	Jacksonville St (139)
Horizon	3/8	Wright St (203)
Colonial	3/8	Delaware (148)			Towson (64 – No Q1)
NEC	3/8	Bryant (215)
Summit	3/8	South Dakota St (72)
WCC	3/8	Gonzaga (1st AP)	St Mary’s (17th AP)	San Francisco (24 – SC) BYU (55)	Santa Clara (67)
Patriot	3/9	Colgate (131)
America East	3/12	Vermont (59)
MEAC	3/12	Norfolk St (162)
MAAC	3/12	Saint Peters (130)
Big 12	3/12	Kansas (6th AP)	Baylor (3rd AP) Texas Tech (14th AP) Texas (22nd AP)	Iowa St (41) Oklahoma (42) TCU (46)	Oklahoma St (45 – 500 Record) Kansas St (71 – Losing Record) West Virginia (78 – Losing Record)
SWAC	3/12	Texas Southern (207)
Big East	3/12	Villanova (8th AP)	Providence (11th AP) Connecticut (20th AP)	Seton Hall (32) Xavier (36) Marquette (38)	Creighton (66) St. John’s (73)
MAC	3/12	Akron (136)
Big Sky	3/12	Montana St (127)
ACC	3/12	Virginia Tech (37)	Duke (7th AP) UNC (25th AP)	Wake Forest (39) Notre Dame (50) Miami FL (59)	Virginia (77)
Conf USA	3/12	UAB (53)		North Texas (43)
Southland	3/12				Nicholls St (189 – Best)
Mt West	3/12	Boise St (30 – SC)	Colorado St (23rd AP)	San Diego St (29 – SC) Wyoming (48)	Utah St (63) Fresno St (69 – No Q1)
WAC	3/12				New Mexico St (87 – Best)
Pac 12	3/12		Arizona (2nd AP) UCLA (13th AP) USC (21st AP)		Washington St (58 – No Q1) Oregon (74) Colorado (75)
Big West	3/12				UC Irvine (124 – Best)
Ivy	3/13				Princeton (102) vs Yale (153)
Atlantic 10	3/13			Davidson (47 – in final) VCU (51) Dayton (52)	St Louis (62) Richmond (85 – in final)
SEC	3/13		Auburn (4th AP) Kentucky (5th AP) Tennessee (9th AP) Arkansas (15th AP) LSU (16th NET) Alabama (28th NET)	Florida (54) Texas A&M (56) Mississippi St (57)	Vanderbilt (79 – 500 Record)
American	3/13		Houston (18th AP)	Memphis (35) SMU (49)
Big 10	3/13		Purdue (10th AP) Wisconsin (12th AP) Illinois (16th AP) Iowa (24th AP) Ohio St (22 NET)	Michigan (31) Michigan St (40) Indiana (44)	Rutgers (76)

Welcome to the 2022 Bracketology Page

Posted on March 2, 2022

I will likely eventually take a dive into the bracketology world. While I do poorly everyone year at seeding the teams, I still love the fact that I can typically guess right the number of teams in my frantic 1-2 weeks of analysis as all the media experts. Hearing them brag about how they got 67 of the 68 teams right is hilarious – there are 32 teams that are automatic qualifiers based on their qualifiers. And while it has happened, it is rare that a Top 25 team gets left out. So, at this point, there are not that many more spots left. Not saying getting those last bubble teams is easy – but it is not like you really had to guess on 68 teams.

Anyways, I still have validation to do to get the main pool site ready. And I have to gather all the Box Scores from the NCAA site – I can’t resist having all my data that I end up not using.

I am sure that I will start ranting about bracketology more soon. Maybe this will be the year that I beat the bracketologists. But probably not – would you trust a ranting lunatic.