Bracketology 2023
Final Bracket
FEATURED
Posted on March 12, 2023
OK – here we go – it is time to seed the teams. And I need to do this quickly. I don’t want to miss the entire Purdue game. Speaking of which, I think that if today’s game was not being played, Purdue would be a 1 seed. UCLA’s loss puts them at 29-5 with big victories against Arizona, Kentucky and Maryland. Purdue is 28-5 with wins against Marquette, Gonzaga, Duke, Maryland, and West Virginia (not to mention two against Michigan St, Illinois, Iowa and Rutgers). The Boilers simply have more wins against tourney teams. But technically, today’s game is being played. So, if Purdue loses, I suspect, UCLA jumps to the top line, and Purdue slips to the 2 seeds.
I also think Alabama’s huge victory over Texas A&M gives them the #1 overall seed. So, I am going to try not to go too far away from the polls – if that is what the majority of the media and coaches think, I suspect the committee will also think that way.
As I do this, I also realize that we wll have a seeding problem with the Big 10. Many of the teams look like they would fit into the 8/9 seeds. But with Purdue being a 1 seed, only 3 of the Big 10 schools can fall into the 8/9 slots.
Also, because of the fact that I want to enjoy the games, for now, I am not going to bother putting into regions – it actually takes some significant effort to make sure you don’t break some of the bracketing rules, so unless the game isn’t fun to watch or I get some time over halftime, this will be it.
Editor Note: I marked the Big 10 and American auto-bid by who was winning the game at halftime (for my tracking of conf auto-bids vs. at large bids) – but I have all 4 remaining teams playing in the bracket….
1. Alabama (SEC), Houston, Purdue (BIG 10), Kansas
2. UCLA, Texas (BIG 12), Marquette (BIG EAST), Arizona (PAC 12)
3. Baylor, Gonzaga (WCC), Kansas State, Connecticut
4. Duke (ACC), Xavier, Texas A&M, Virginia
5. Indiana, Miami FL, Tennessee, TCU
6. St. Mary’s CA, San Diego State (MT WEST), Iowa State, Kentucky
7. Creighton, Missouri, Maryland, Northwestern
8. Auburn, Michigan State, Arkansas, Iowa
9. Illinois, Memphis (AMERICAN), West Virginia, Florida Atlantic (CONF USA)
10. Boise State, Rutgers, USC, Penn State
11. Mississippi State, Providence, NC State / Arizona State, Utah State / Pitt
12. Drake (MVC), VCU (ATL 10), Oral Roberts (SUMMIT), Charleston (COLONIAL)
13. Kent State (MAC), Iona (MAAC), Furman (SOUTHERN), Louisiana (SUN BELT)
14. Colgate (PATRIOT), Vermont (AM EAST), Princeton (IVY), Kennesaw State (ATL SUN)
15. UC Santa Barbara (BIG WEST), Montana State (BIG SKY), Grand Canyon (WAC), UNC Asheville (BIG SOUTH)
16. Northern Kentucky (HORIZON), Texas A&M – Corpus Christi (SOUTHLAND), Howard (MEAC) / SE Missouri State (OVC), Fairleigh Dickinson (NEC) / Texas Southern (SWAC)
Tom’s Initial Selection Board
FEATURED
Posted on March 8, 2023
So, I need to make some progress here – might as well start to look at what the selection board looks like. Typically, if you are going to be an at large team, you need to be in the top 80 of the NET rankings. I am going to also include Vanderbilt at 82nd (I have to feel a team tied for 4th in the SEC needs to at least be under consideration – they might be this year’s surprise).
§ Safe locks – these are teams in the Top 30 of the NET rankings that also are in the top 25 of one of the polls
§ Traditional locks – these are teams in the polls, top 30 of the NET from a power conference, or top 20 from a non-power conference. I will likely include all these teams but it is hard for me to take a team like Arkansas or West Virginia that has a losing record in their conference and call them a lock.
§ Not likely – the fact that they are in the top 80 of the NET means they are under consideration. However, the fact that they don’t have a Quad 1 win or have 15 or more losses (which would mean they would break the record for most losses by an at large team if they lose in their conference tournament).
§ Bubble – this will be larger than a traditional bubble, but honestly, this is the group where anything can happen.
§ At large – just a tracker to make sure we don’t forget about our automatic bids. They don’t need to worry about the selection committee.
SAFE LOCKS – 23 teams (9 CONF LEADERS in BOLD)
§ Houston (AP 1, Coaches 1, NET 1) – AMERICAN
§ UCLA (AP 2, Coaches 2, NET 4) – PAC 12
§ Kansas (AP 3, Coaches 4, NET 7) – BIG 12
§ Alabama (AP 4, Coaches 5, NET 2) – SEC
§ Purdue (AP 5, Coaches 3, NET 5) – BIG 10
§ Marquette (AP 6, Coaches 6, NET 13) – BIG EAST
§ Texas (AP 7, Coaches 7, NET 10)
§ Arizona (AP 8, Coaches 9, NET 11)
§ Gonzaga (AP 9, Coaches 8, NET 9) – WCC
§ Baylor (AP 10, Coaches 10, NET 12)
§ Connecticut (AP 11, Coaches 14, NET 6)
§ Kansas State (AP 12, Coaches 12, NET 17)
§ Virginia (AP 13, Coaches 11, NET 30) – ACC
§ Xavier (AP 15, Coaches 15, NET 22)
§ St. Mary’s (AP 16, Coaches 16, NET 8)
§ Tennessee (AP 17, Coaches 19, NET 3)
§ Texas A&M (AP 18, Coaches 18, NET 23)
§ Indiana (AP 19, Coaches 17, NET 29)
§ San Diego St (AP 20, Coaches 20, NET 16) – MT WEST
§ Duke (AP 21, Coaches 21, NET 25)
§ TCU (AP 22, Coaches 23, NET 28)
§ Kentucky (AP 23, Coaches 24, NET 20)
§ Creighton (AP 24, Coaches 22, NET 14)
TRADITIONAL LOCKS – 8 teams (1 CONF LEADER)
§ Miami FL (AP 14, Coaches 13, NET 35)
§ Missouri (AP 25, NET 48)
§ Northwestern (Coaches 25, NET 38)
§ Florida Atlantic (NET 15) – CONF USA
§ Arkansas (NET 18)
§ Iowa St (NET 19)
§ West Virginia (NET 24)
§ Maryland (NET 26)
BUBBLE – 34 teams for 15 spots ignoring conf leader (1 CONF LEADER)
§ Utah St (NET 21)
§ Boise St (NET 27)
§ Michigan St (NET 31)
§ Auburn (NET 32)
§ Illinois (NET 33)
§ Memphis (NET 34)
§ Nevada (NET 36)
§ Iowa (NET 37)
§ North Texas (NET 39)
§ NC State (NET 40)
§ Rutgers (NET 41)
§ Oklahoma State (NET 42)
§ USC (NET 45)
§ Mississippi State (NET 46)
§ Oregon (NET 47)
§ North Carolina (NET 49)
§ New Mexico (NET 50)
§ Providence (NET 52)
§ Michigan (NET 54)
§ Penn State (NET 56)
§ Pitt (NET 57)
§ UAB (NET 58)
§ Sam Houston St (NET 59) – WAC
§ Clemson (NET 61)
§ Arizona State (NET 64)
§ Virginia Tech (NET 68)
§ UCF (NET 72)
§ Utah Valley (NET 74)
§ Seton Hall (NET 75)
§ Utah (NET 76)
§ Dayton (NET 77)
§ Wisconsin (NET 78)
§ Cincinnati (NET 79)
§ Vanderbilt (NET 82)
NOT LIKELY – 13 teams (4 CONF LEADERS)
§ Liberty (NET 43)
§ Texas Tech (NET 55)
§ Florida (NET 60)
§ Yale (NET 62) – IVY (March 12th)
§ Ohio State (NET 63)
§ Oklahoma (NET 65)
§ Iona (NET 66) – MAAC (March 11th)
§ VCU (NET 67) – ATLANTIC 10 (March 12th)
§ Kent State (NET 69) – MAC (March 11th)
§ Washington State (NET 70)
§ Colorado (NET 71)
§ Bradley (NET 73)
§ Villanova (NET 80)
AUTOMATIC BIDS (17 REMAINING CONF LEADERS)
§ Oral Roberts (NET 44) – SUMMIT
§ College of Charleston (NET 51) – COLONIAL
§ Drake (NET 53) – MISSOURI VALLEY
§ Furman (NET 88) – SOUTHERN
§ Louisiana (NET 89) – SUN BELT
§ Kennesaw State (NET 113) – ATLANTIC SUN
§ UNC – Asheville (NET 139) – BIG SOUTH
§ Northern Kentucky (NET 161) – HORIZON
§ SE Missouri State (NET 244) – OVC
§ Fairleigh Dickinson (NET 300) – NEC
§ SOUTHLAND (March 8th)
§ PATRIOT (March 8th)
§ BIG SKY (March 8th)
§ AMERICA EAST (March 11th)
§ MEAC (March 11th)
§ SWAC (March 11th)
§ BIG WEST (March 11th)
So, this short rank ordering of the NET ranking has gone from picking 68 of the 350+ teams, to picking 15 of 34 teams. I do think that bubble is going to be difficult to separate this year. But suddenly not as daunting of a task as it is made out by the bracketologists. That said, it Florida Atlantic doesn’t win the Conference USA tournament,
While I am sure I won’t do this, I might be better off seeding the top 25 simply based off their AP ranking. I probably am over thinking things if I think Baylor is something other than a 3 seed if the AP Poll thinks Baylor is the 10th best team in the country, and the Coaches Poll thinks Baylor is the 10th best team in the country. If Baylor wins the Big 12, we can reconsider – but spending a ton of time here is probably a recipe for getting the seeding wrong.
It is the bubble where I need to spend the time. That will have to be my focus in the next few days.
Recognizing the Regular Season Conference Champions
FEATURED
Posted on March 3, 2023
As some of the conference tournaments begin, there are a few teams out there who don’t have the luxury of being able to lose a game down the stretch. Such is the world of the regular season champion of a non-power conference. And if we don’t mention them soon, some of them might lose their season before we get the chance to recognize them.
By tracking the conference championship finals, we can have a preview of when automatic bids are being played for. And we can use this as an opportunity to recognize the regular season champions. For the bracketology page, it is also appropriate because those regular season champions automatically get put on the “Under Consideration” board for the selection committee in the case that they get upset in their conference tournament. We know many of them won’t survive that upset – but this at least gives us a chance to recognize a fantastic season by these teams. A couple conferences might still be up for grabs this weekend – so I am going to list the leaders as of today. For those who are curious, the selection committee only puts the #1 seed into the tournament into the Under Consideration list if they get beat. But for our fun blog, why not be inclusive (and in the Big West’s case, since games are playing as I type, I considered a tie based on solely the loss column). Teams in bold are (or have clinched) the #1 seed for their conference.
|
DATE |
CONFERENCE |
REG SEASON CHAMP |
AUTOMATIC BID |
|
3/4 |
Ohio Valley |
Morehead St (21-10, 14-4) |
SE Missouri State |
|
3/5 |
Big South |
UNC-Asheville (24-7, 16-2) |
UNC-Asheville |
|
3/5 |
Missouri Valley |
Bradley (23-8, 16-4) |
Drake |
|
3/5 |
Atlantic Sun |
Kennesaw St (25-8,
15-3) |
Kennesaw State |
|
3/6 |
Sun Belt |
Southern Miss (25-6, 14-4) |
Louisiana |
|
3/6 |
Southern |
Furman (24-7,
15-3) |
Furman |
|
3/7 |
Horizon |
Youngstown St (24-8, 15-5) |
Northern Kentucky |
|
3/7 |
NEC |
Merrimack (16-16, 12-4) |
Fairleigh Dickinson |
|
3/7 |
Colonial |
Hofstra (23-8, 16-2) |
Charleston |
|
3/7 |
Summit |
Oral Roberts (27-4, 18-0) |
Oral Roberts |
|
3/7 |
West Coast |
Gonzaga (26-5, 14-2) |
Gonzaga |
|
3/8 |
Southland |
Texas A&M-CC (21-10, 14-4) |
Texas A&M – CC |
|
3/8 |
Patriot |
Colgate (24-8, 17-1) |
Colgate |
|
3/8 |
Big Sky |
Eastern Washington (22-9, 16-2) |
Montana State |
|
3/11 |
America East |
Vermont (20-10, 14-2) |
Vermont |
|
3/11 |
MEAC |
Howard (19-12, 11-3) |
Howard |
|
3/11 |
SWAC |
Alcorn St (18-12, 15-3) |
Texas Southern |
|
3/11 |
Big 12 |
Kansas (25-6, 13-5) |
Texas |
|
3/11 |
Mountain West |
San Diego St (24-6, 15-3) |
San Diego St |
|
3/11 |
Big East |
Marquette (25-6, 17-3) |
Marquette |
|
3/11 |
MAAC |
Iona (24-7, 17-3) |
Iona |
|
3/11 |
MAC |
Toledo (25-6, 16-2) |
Kent St |
|
3/11 |
Conf USA |
Florida Atlantic (28-3, 18-2) |
Florida Atlantic |
|
3/11 |
ACC |
Miami FL (24-6,
15-5) |
Duke |
|
3/11 |
Big West |
UC-Santa Barbara (24-7,
15-5) |
UC-Santa Barbara |
|
3/11 |
Pac 12 |
UCLA (27-4, 18-2) |
Arizona |
|
3/11 |
WAC |
Utah Valley (24-7, 15-3) |
Grand Canyon vs Southern Utah |
|
3/12 |
Ivy |
Yale (20-7, 10-4) |
Yale vs Princeton |
|
3/12 |
Atlantic 10 |
VCU (24-7, 15-3) |
VCU vs Dayton |
|
3/12 |
SEC |
Alabama (26-5, 16-2) |
Alabama vs Texas A&M |
|
3/12 |
American |
Houston (29-2, 17-1) |
Houston vs Memphis |
|
3/12 |
Big 10 |
Purdue (26-5, 15-5) |
Purdue vs Penn State |
Finalizing the Bubble
Posted on March 12, 2023
Maybe it is just because I am getting old. Maybe I haven’t watched enough basketball this season. Maybe sleep deprivation is kicking in early. But I am really struggling to create my bracket this year. I took a peek at the Bracket Matrix and my first thoughts of who will get the last spots late last night looked like the consensus – well, that’s boring, so I probably need to change that. The committee always has one surprise – and I do so horrible at seeding the teams, so why not go crazy and try to pick the surprise. What is the worst that happens – I do badly at this again.
Still, there is only 4 hours left before the committee tells us the answer, and I would like to actually enjoy watching the Purdue game instead of creating a bracket. So, I am seriously running out of time. So, lets look at my remaining 18 teams.
The Mountain West is going to confuse me. Last time, the committee awarded a 4th team, although their only big wins were against each other. This year, they look the same. Boise State has a victory over Texas A&M. Utah State’s best non-conference victory is Oral Roberts. Nevada’s is Sam Houston State. That doesn’t look like a team like Memphis, who has victories over Texas A&M, Auburn, VCU, and Vanderbilt. I don’t think the committee wants to not let the 19th ranked team in their NET rankings miss the tournament, but I think a team further down like Nevada is likely out. My rank ordering of these 4 is Memphis, Boise State, Utah State, Nevada.
I am going to put Penn State in as well – they have victories against 9 teams that I have likely in the tournament and no losses against a team with a NET > 100.
I can’t see the Pac 12 only get Arizona and UCLA – lets rank their 3 teams. Oregon has home wins against Arizona, Nevada and USC and a road win against Arizona St. They also had 4 losses against smaller schools or bad Pac 12 schools which don’t look good. USC has home wins against UCLA and Auburn, and swept Arizona St in the regular season. They had 2 losses against small schools or bad Pac 12 schools, but in general, did better with their schedule. Arizona State did better away from home. They won on the road against Arizona and Oregon, and had neutral wins vs. Creighton, USC, and VCU, with three bad losses. Based on this, I am going to rank them as USC, Arizona State and Oregon.
The ACC is a complete mess. And they have 5 teams in this conversation. I think Virginia Tech just has too many losses. They have 6 good wins (Duke, Virginia, Oklahoma State, Penn State, UNC, and Pitt) – I will also give them the win on Dayton. But they also lost 5 against the weaker part of the ACC (giving them a 9-13 record in conference if you include the ACC tournament). UNC only could get the win at home against Virginia in their 9 games against locks in the tournament. They did split against NC State, and had some decent bubblish wins (Charleston, Clemson, Ohio State, and Michigan). But getting swept by Pitt probably will do them in. Lots of close losses – but they are still losses. NC State has one extra win (the split against UNC, split against Duke and Miami FL). They lost 3 times to Clemson and lost to Pitt. But Clemson creates a complicated discussion. How can I think Clemson isn’t better than NC State after they beat them 3 times! I am not actually sure I do think they are worse. But Clemson is going to be the NCAA example team. Their non-conference SOS was 321st in the country. And then they lost 3 of those games against teams in the NET 200+. So those good victories they have get destroyed by the bad losses. That leaves Pitt. Pitt was a close game away against Miami from claiming the ACC regular season title. Instead, that loss has them as a NET 67 team on the bubble. They do have victories against Virginia, Miami, Northwestern, NC State and the sweep against UNC. I think Pitt’s biggest problem is they have a bad tendency to lose big (like the 27 point end of their season to Duke). I think my ordering is going to be NC State, Pitt, Clemson, UNC, VT
I think Mississippi State might be safe comparing to others – with their 5 wins against Marquette, Texas A&M, Arkansas, TCU and Missouri. Wins against 4 ranked teams is more than what many on the bubble have. I think Providence is also in – they won against Marquette, UConn, and Creighton. Close losses to St. John’s and St. Louis aren’t great, but they have no 100+ NET losses like others on this list.
To make my decisions work, I am going to leave out Oklahoma State. I am biased, and already frustrated with putting a team like West Virginia in the list. With all the opportunities of the Big 12, the Cowboys only got a sweep against Iowa State, and home victories against West Virginia and TCU. They also have losses against Virginia Tech and Southern Illinois. I think they are going to be one of the first teams out.
The last two teams are Wisconsin and Vanderbilt. These would be the classic high NET team that gets in. Wisconsin has wins against Marquette, Maryland and a sweep of Iowa. They also beat Penn State and USC along the bubble. They only played 5 teams outside the top 100. But 17-14 is tough for me to put in, especially with the Badgers losing 9 of their last 14 games.
Now, lets talk about Vanderbilt. They finished with a 20-14 record. They beat Tennessee, Arkansas, Kentucky twice, Auburn and Mississippi State. They also have a home victory over Pitt. They went 13-8 in the SEC, a conference where we have a couple teams with losing conference records already in the field. Their non-conference SOS was 7th, so they didn’t play a weak schedule. They do have a couple bad losses in LSU and Grambling but so does most of the bubble. So why is their NET ranking 81st. I don’t know. Maybe it was the 57 point loss at Alabama. I really want to pull the trigger here. This would be the surprise by the committee to ignore the rankings and go by the eye test. Although the eye test also has them falling far behind Kentucky before coming storming back to win in the SEC quarterfinals, just to fall behind big to Texas A&M and not come back in the semi-finals. The statistics say Vanderbilt is out, and so while it is boring, that is what I am going to go with. With it being 3:19 pm, I can’t keep dwelling on this. I want to put Vanderbilt in the tournament, but the smart thing is to go with someone like Pitt. I think that puts my bracket in agreement with the Bracket Matrix – which also makes me sad – so boring. But I guess that makes the point. Without spending more than a week on this, you can end up with basically what everyone else thinks is the answer.
IN (Not necessarily in order): Penn State, Memphis, Mississippi State, Boise State, Utah State, USC, Arizona State, Providence, NC State, Pitt
FIRST FOUR OUT: Oklahoma State, Vanderbilt, Nevada, Clemson
NEXT FOUR OUT: North Carolina, Wisconsin, Oregon, Virginia Tech (it is probably more like one of the 17-15 teams like Michigan).
Adding more teams to the field
Posted on March 12, 2023
Lets continue to reduce the size of the bubble without digging too deep into teams schedules. When you are from one of the power conferences, as long as you have some quad 1 wins, you are likely in as long as you are in the top 40 of the NET. Top 30 seem to always be safe, and most likely the top 40 are as well.
Iowa State, Arkansas, West Virginia and Maryland are in the top 30 and all have at least 3 quad 1 wins. I probably should look more at them, but chances of a team like Maryland (3-10 quad 1) or Arkansas (4-10 quad 1) being left out over a team ranked in the 70s of the NET is low.
If we are saying power conference teams in the high NET rankings are good with at least 3 quad 1 wins, that probably makes Auburn, Michigan State, Iowa and Rutgers safe. I am also going to give NET 41 Northwestern a place in the dance – their 7-5 record against quad 1 teams is certainly better than some of the teams already locked, and is definitely better than anyone who hasn’t been mentioned.
I am also going to surprise myself and put in Illinois. Their NET is 34th – which is normally safe, but somehow, they were only 2-10 against quad 1 teams. That is because the only quad 1 game they got to play at home was Indiana (and they lost that game). But their two quad 1 victories are neutral court victories against #2 UCLA and #7 Texas. And they have no real bad losses (there only two other losses are both to Penn State, who is now playing for the Big 10 tournament championship on Sunday).
So, 20 spots are now down to 10. The complicated piece is now next. How to pick 10 from the final 18 teams, especially when we also have 4 really good non-power conference teams in Utah State, Boise State, Nevada and Memphis.
Need to shrink the bubble
Posted on March 12, 2023
I normally start my “Under Consideration” Board to those around the top 80 in the NET rankings. But being that it is Saturday night, I need to start shrinking that list. So, here are the teams that are leaving the bubble.
Of the teams still playing
The loser of the VCU / Dayton game in the Atlantic 10 championship will be out. The only Quad 1 win for either team is Dayton’s road victory over VCU. That is simply not going to be enough. Yale needs to win the Ivy League championship against Princeton or they will be eliminated. UAB is down 23 to Florida Atlantic with 2:46 left to play. They have the highest NET ranking of this list at 52, and they do have 2 Quad 1 wins. But those are a great home victory against FAU and the Conf USA semi-final against North Texas. Their non-conference saw them lose a neutral court game to Toledo by 8 and a road loss to West Virginia by 11 in the only two games they played against the top 80 in NET. They are out.
A team has never received an at large bid with more than 15 losses. So, I am not going to bet on it now – that eliminates Ohio State, Florida, Texas Tech, Oklahoma, Colorado, Washington State, and Villanova.
Having no quad 1 wins is always a bad sign – so that eliminates Liberty, Bradley and Toledo. Having only one quad 1 win also normally isn’t a good sign. While not eliminating every one of these teams yet, we will take out some of them. UCF’s quad 1 win was a neutral court win in the Bahamas against Oklahoma State (who might also be out) – but they then went 8-10 in the American conference. You might be able to survive that in the Big 12, but not in the American. Cincinnati also goes down. They had a golden opportunity today against Houston, especially with Sasser getting hurt early. They ended up losing by 21. That makes their only quad 1 win being a road win against UCF (who we just eliminated).
We will also eliminate the two WAC teams, making the WAC a one-bid conference. Sam Houston St started the season strong with a 1 point road victory against Oklahoma and a quad 2 road victory against Utah. But they lost by double digits in their other non-conference quad 1 games against Nevada and Oklahoma State. Utah Valley had a road victory against Oregon, but lost by double digits to Boise State and Utah State. Then, both these teams lost in the WAC semi-finals. So, I suspect they are out.
The worst winning percentage of an at-large team has been 0.533 (16-14). That means Michigan, Seton Hall and Utah are out with 17-15 records. North Texas has a solid NET ranking of 38th. But their only quad 1 victory was a road victory vs. UAB (who we recently eliminated). In the non-conference, they did not play a single power conference school, and their only quad 1 games was a 30 point loss to St. Mary’s. Losing in the Conf USA semis to UAB probably ended their chances.
The last team is a more complicated one – but I can’t see 5 Mountain West teams making it. New Mexico was one of the last undefeated teams in the country. But they were like North Texas from the perspective that they played no power conference team in non-conference. But, they did go on the road and beat St. Mary’s by 4. They also have a 2nd quad 1 victory by beating San Diego State on the road. Beating two teams currently ranked in the top 25 is impressive for a non-power conference team. They also had a third quad 1 victory at home vs Boise State. But here is New Mexico’s undoing. After that Boise State victory, they lost 9 of their last 13 games (including being swept by quad 3 Air Force and losing a quad 4 home loss vs. Wyoming). I know that the committee doesn’t look at how a team finishes the season, but you can’t have a schedule that plays no one from a power conference team and lose multiple games against quad 3 and quad 4 teams.
So, that takes 23 teams off the board. I will also say that all the ranked teams are in – right now, 16 of them will definitely need at large bids. There are also 2 more complicated cases of Purdue and Houston. If they win tomorrow, they take their conference auto-bid, leaving 20 more at large bids to be given. However, if Penn State or Memphis win, some at large bids disappear. It is very possible that both Penn State and Memphis have played their way in. But for now, I am going to assume that there are 20 spots left and that those remaining bubble teams will need to get an at-large bid to get to the dance. We can rank them off their current resume – since if they get that one last big victory, they will no longer need to convince the committee they should be dancing.
If I have done my counting correctly, that means I now have 28 teams competing for 20 spots (with 2 teams becoming the biggest fans for Purdue and Houston tomorrow afternoon).
Well – that doesn’t feel as daunting as I felt a few hours ago. Then again, with losing an hour to Daylight Savings time, it isn’t like I have a lot of time left (and I still have to seed everyone).
Figuring out potential bid stealers
Posted on March 2, 2023
At some point, I really would love to try something where I could simulate the selection committee in an attempt to get a better predicted bracket. But honestly, it is a daunting task that is difficult to simulate. That is because the selection is done by a very sophisticated set of votes by a committee of 12 people (who obviously all have different opinions on who are the best remaining teams to select).
Unfortunately for me, I am one person who has specific biases – and thus, it becomes complicated to duplicate this process. I can’t vote as if I am the Arizona AD, and then vote as if I am the Minnesota AD (well, I guess I could let my split personalities come out – but not sure that they would differ enough to represent each committee member effectively).
One thing I have failed miserably with is conference standings. The committee does not care about the conference standings – they simply pick the next best teams. For example, right now, the ACC has a three way tie at the top with Pitt, Miami and Virginia – with Duke and Clemson one game behind. The committee does not care. If they feel Duke is a better team than Pitt, they will rank them accordingly. I struggle with this because in some cases it can be obvious (if Duke is ranked 21st in the NET and Pitt is ranked 52nd, there is a good chance, Duke gets selected first). But in other cases, it can be tough to read.
The other thing that I struggle with is conference record. I have a strong opinion that if a team is 6-11 in the conference, they shouldn’t be considered one of the best at large candidates. But if you look at a team like West Virginia who has played a ridiculously hard schedule and was 11-2 in non-conference before losing a bunch of games to Kansas, Baylor and Texas (which almost any team in the country would lose), you have to reconsider that opinion. It is hard for me because I feel if you are in a power conference and can’t win half of your games in that conference, wouldn’t it be better to give a chance to a small conference team that didn’t get the chance to play 17 games against quad 1 teams than the one that could only win 5 of those 17 games. But once again, the committee doesn’t look at conference records. And wins like their 25 point victory over Pitt (one of the 3 ACC leaders) needs to be considered. Maybe the committee is right here despite my feelings to give more opportunities to the other conferences.
Anyways, there are lots of reasons I am bad at this. But from the initial point of the bracketology exercise, I can still create some fun content while showing that the major sports networks bracketologist like Joe Lunardi and Jerry Palm are not as super amazing as every single halftime show in March on ESPN makes them out to be. Because you can narrow the field down pretty quickly. And that really leaves some ridiculously hard choices for the last 4-8 teams. But that still means that you likely will get at least 65 of the 68 teams without needing to monitor the list all year long.
So lets start with some advertising for the small conferences. In some cases, their tournaments have already started. And these conference tournaments can really impact the bubble. Here is a great way to look at it. While the NET ranking might not be perfect, it is probably fair to say that if you are not in the top 80 teams in the NET ranking, you will not get an at-large bid. Last year, I believe Rutgers became the team with the worst NET ranking to get an at-large bid at 80th. I seem to remember also in the 1990s New Mexico having an RPI of 82nd and still getting in. So – it happens from time to time, but for the most part if you are not top 80, you are not getting in.
Why does that matter. Well, 12 of the 14 Big Ten teams are in the top 80, and all 10 of the Big 12 teams are in the top 80. They are likely going to send at least 7 of those teams into the tournament, and most likely their conference tournament will be won by one of those 7 teams. So, while it can happen, this is not likely where your bid-stealer will come from.
On the
other hand, if you take the West Coast Conference, Gonzaga and St. Mary’s are
definitely in. But what if BYU has a great week in Vegas and wins the WCC
tournament. Now, a bubble team is going to have to make room for BYU – a bid
has now been stolen.
So, to see where a bubble team has to worry, one can look for the conferences that
have a few teams in the top 80 but not as many who are obvious to get in.
The most dangerous tournaments to the bubble teams:
§ Pac 12 – yes, this is a power conference. But only Arizona and UCLA seem to be locks. I think a few others like USC or Arizona State will find their way in, but any champion not named Arizona or UCLA is a team that might not have originally been in the field.
§ Mountain West – this is a fun conference to watch. They have 5 teams in the top 80, and yet, San Diego State might be the only lock of them (although Boise St’s victory over SDSU gives them a really good resume as well).
§ American – this conference has 4 teams in the top 80, but only Houston can say they are safely in the field.
§ Conference USA – Florida Atlantic being in the top 25 this late in the season suggests they will be in – but North Texas and UAB are two top 80 teams that can certainly cause trouble in the conference tournament.
§ West Coast – If someone not named Gonzaga or St. Mary’s steals this conference tournament championship, they will be stealing someone’s bid as well.
The true on-the-fence conferences – these are the ones that have a team in the top 80, but there is a good chance that they don’t win an at-large bid if they lose in their conference tournament. This makes for some really great basketball from some really talented and desperate teams. But it also raises the sad reality that the bid that is stolen is from their own conference regular season champions.
§ Atlantic 10 – VCU and Dayton are really talented teams, but they are likely not going to get an at-large bid. This is traditionally such a tough league to win, so it should be fun to watch.
§ MAC – The same can be said about Kent St and Toledo.
§ Missouri Valley – The same can be said about Bradley and Drake
§ Atlantic Sun – Onto the conferences with only one team in the top 80. Here we have Liberty (39th)
§ Colonial – Charleston at 53rd can get to 30 wins and still lose their conference championsip.
§ Ivy – Yale (65th)
§ MAAC – Iona (57th)
§ Summit – Oral Roberts (42nd)
§ Sun Belt – Marshall (78th)
§ WAC – Sam Houston State (62nd)
So there is our starting point to watch – lots of fun small conference tournaments that could lead to a tremendous amount of drama!
Committee’s Initial Preview
Posted on February 26, 2023
Well, I haven’t even made it into pulling the box scores – so not sure I am ready to be looking at this level. But I do horribly at seeding the teams. And at least at the top of the bracket, I shouldn’t as bad as I am. Part of that is because I am picking based on my assessments. Part of that is because typically I am rushing to just get a bracket done.
But maybe the most important part is that I don’t leverage the information the committee gives me well. Each year, the committee gives an initial reveal of their bracket (typically the Saturday that is 3 weeks before Selection Sunday). I criticize the bracketologists each year about the fact that many of the teams are easy to know will make it. But when it comes to seeding, I completely forget that the committee has told us their thoughts 3 weeks beforehand.
Sure, there is 3 weeks of games left after that reveal. But last year, 15 of the 16 teams in that reveal ended up staying as one of the top 16 teams. So, why not at least listen to what they said. Here is the reveal:
1 seeds – Alabama, Houston, Purdue, Kansas
2 seeds – Texas, Arizona, Baylor, UCLA
3 seeds – Tennessee, Virginia, Iowa State, Kansas State
4 seeds – Indiana, Marquette, Gonzaga, Xavier
Also in consideration (which has to make me imagine these would be their 5 seeds) – Creighton, Miami FL, St. Mary’s, UConn
So – there is the top 20 as of Feb 18th. We can probably look at how those teams finished to see if they should stay in that order. Well – that is what I would think at least…..
I will probably do many different types of rank orderings like this. Hopefully, they will help me seed things better. At a minimum, it should give you an over-abundance of information about the teams.
2023 Bracketology Blog
Posted on February 26, 2023
As always, I will probably take a stab into the bracketology world. Might as well start my sleep deprivation early. 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.
Maybe this will be the year that I beat the bracketologists. But probably not – would you trust a ranting lunatic.