NCAA Tournament – FINAL Bracket Projection

First, the bracket itself.

Where am I most likely to be wrong:

• 1-line — I actually had Iowa St surpassing UNC on most metrics in the final day — but I’m skeptical that it wasn’t too late for the committee to make changes given the number of other things on their plate with bid stealers — plus UNC AD Bubba Cunningham on the committee. So UNC it is.
• 3/4 — Auburn has all the efficiency metrics of a top 4/5 team in the country, with only one of their wins by single digits. I’m not sure I’ve ever seen that. They also won the SEC today. On the flip side, their resume is sorely lacking. End of the day, I moved them above Duke and an injured Kansas for the final 3.
• 6 line down — I have no idea how the MWC will be viewed — as a conference and in what order. I’ll assume 5 bids, with Colorado St hurt by the shrinking bubble.
• I don’t love the resumes of teams on the 8 line on down, but I think the whole package is better than the teams that missed out. With the shrinking bubble, I wouldn’t be shocked if Mississippi St on through my Dayton play-in teams miss. I think everyone through Wazzou is safe.
• Bubble: this gets really hard. I’ll assume St John’s, Virginia, and Colorado St are the three teams that missed out from yesterday’s 3 stolen bids (Pac-12, ACC, AAC).
• From my ratings, I usually take 2-4 teams up from outside my quantitative starting point into the field, replacing a handful of others. This year…I’m doing that with just two: final four team FAU likely gets the benefit of the doubt and replaces a Providence team they were already really close to in my rankings. And Seton Hall’s resume stands out over St John’s despite better metrics.

Bracket Update 3/7/24

Conference Tourney Time! Bracket 3/5/24

Let’s get the Bracket Projections rolling. A quick reminder that I’m attempting to project the NCAA tournament bracket as it will be on Selection Sunday rather than today. And that with only 2 weeks left, there’s likely not a ton of difference between the two.

I’ve provided the raw rankings for teams so you can see how big/little of a gap exists between teams. The small gap between Providence and Virginia for instance demonstrates there’s really nothing to separate those teams today.

In addition, I’ll note that this formula (adjusted over time, i.e. for NET becoming more prevalent in its current iteration) has effectively missed a maximum of 3 teams and I expect that to be similar this year. Then I’ll make manual adjustments for what lies under the hood of those resumes in the final days leading to Selection Sunday and who is most likely to make the field. But just hope your team makes it to the left side of this bubble ranking by Selection Sunday – as making it otherwise means you’d need to be one of the exceptions to make the field.

NCAA Tournament Projection – FINAL

NCAA Tournament Projection, Saturday 3/11

NCAA Tournament Field, Friday March 10

NCAA Tournament Field, Wed March 8, 2023

NCAA Tournament Field – March 6, 2023

NCAA Tournament Field, March 3, 2023

10 days until Selection Sunday! It’s long past time.

NCAA Tournament Final Projection

A wild final week for teams on the bubble (not a happy one for this Demon Deacon fan) saw as many teams as I can remember improving their resume over the season’s final week. Those who lost early had nothing to do but watch as other teams passed them by the hour. Richmond stealing a bid from Davidson was the final straw for a number of team’s hopes — with 7 teams of a quality that could have gotten in during weaker seasons left on the outside. Which 7 those will be could prove to be hotly contested after the fact. My guess is the average bracketologist (myself included!) will miss more teams than normal this year. Here’s to hoping I miss less than the rest.

I’m a veteran forecaster but this is my first bracket since 2017 — and I haven’t done one since the NET replaced RPI as the de facto metric of choice. My old model was rendered somewhat moot and I’ve had to simplify and adjust on the fly this year. That said, I’m largely happy with the results of my tweaked quantitative starting point. Of my field, only 3 at-large bids come from outside the top 47 teams, and thus 3 of those 47 from a strictly quantitative starting point that doesn’t include records or assessment of quality of wins will miss my field.

The unlucky 3: Oklahoma (41), SMU (44), Wake Forest (45). 15 losses will likely dog Oklahoma. SMU and Wake have better records and largely played like teams good enough to dance, but may not have racked up enough quality wins if they do indeed fall short.

The lucky 3 that take their place: Creighton (48), Miami (49), and Rutgers (63). The first two seemed to win enough games against good opponents all year, and especially late in Creighton’s case. Miami completing the OT win against BC in the ACCT could be all that separates them from suffering the same fate as Wake Forest. Rutgers has the strangest resume in recent memory, a lot of bad early losses, metrics that aren’t indicative of a team close to the bubble (in a bad way), but wins against 7 of the top 8 in the Big Ten, which includes 4 wins over likely 3-5 seeds. The wins look like those of a 3-4 seed — and ultimately push me over the top in selecting them despite the metrics.

Here’s the final projection: