Final "Field of 68" Projection (3/13/11, 1:09 a.m.)

Donate To GopherHole
S

SelectionSunday

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 12, 2008
Messages
24,695
Reaction score
4,834
Points
113
Here's my final projection of the NCAA Tournament field. For what it's worth, the Gophers had 6 wins vs. my projected Field of 68. ... Akron, Michigan, North Carolina, Purdue, West Virginia and Wofford. Please note below the contingency regarding tomorrow's Atlantic 10 championship game pitting Dayton vs. Richmond.

I really struggled with the last 2 or 3. Went with my gut, but I think a coin flip would work just as well. Won't be surprised if I miss 2 or 3 this year.

FIELD OF 68 (Final, 2011)
America East (1): Boston U

ACC (5): Clemson, Duke, Florida State, North Carolina, Virginia Tech

Atlantic Sun (1): Belmont

Atlantic 10 (3): Richmond, Temple, Xavier

Big East (11): Cincinnati, Connecticut, Georgetown, Louisville, Marquette, Notre Dame, Pitt, St. John's, Syracuse, Villanova, West Virginia

Big Sky (1): Northern Colorado

Big South (1): North Carolina-Asheville

Big 10 (7): Illinois, Michigan, Michigan State, Ohio State, Penn State, Purdue, Wisconsin

Big 12 (6): Colorado, Kansas, Kansas State, Missouri, Texas, Texas A&M

Big West (1): UCSB

Colonial (3): George Mason, Old Dominion, **VCU

Conference USA (1): Memphis

Horizon (1): Butler

Ivy (1): Princeton

Metro Atlantic (1): St. Peter's

MAC (1): Akron

MEAC (1): Hampton

Missouri Valley (1): Indiana State

Mountain West (3): BYU, San Diego State, UNLV

Northeast (1): Long Island

Ohio Valley (1): Morehead State

Pac 10 (4): Arizona, UCLA, USC, Washington

Patriot (1): Bucknell

SEC (4): Florida, Kentucky, Tennessee, Vanderbilt

Southern (1): Wofford

Southland (1): Texas-San Antonio

SWAC (1): Alabama State

Summit (1): Oakland

Sun Belt (1): Arkansas-Little Rock

West Coast (1): Gonzaga

WAC (1): Utah State

----------------
Last 4 In: Clemson, Colorado, USC, **VCU

First 4 Out: Boston College, Georgia, St. Mary's, UAB

**Sunday Contingency: If Dayton defeats Richmond in Sunday's Atlantic 10 championship game, the Flyers replace VCU (my last team in) in the field. In that scenario, Villanova then becomes the fourth of my "last 4 in".

Non-BCS At-Larges (6): BYU, George Mason, Temple, UNLV, VCU (or Richmond if it loses to Dayton on Sunday), Xavier

BCS Teams in the Field: 37 (54.4%)

Non-BCS Teams in the Field: 31 (45.6%)

I've projected the NCAA Tournament at-large qualifiers since the 1991-92 season. Here's my track record with the at-larges.
1991-92: 33/34
1992-93: 31/34
1993-94: 30/34
1994-95: 30/34
1995-96: 33/34
1996-97: 31/34
1997-98: 30/34
1998-99: 31/34
1999-00: 32/34
2000-01: 34/34 (perfect)
2001-02: 33/34
2002-03: 33/34
2003-04: 31/34
2004-05: 32/34
2005-06: 31/34
2006-07: 32/34
2007-08: 33/34
2008-09: 34/34 (perfect)
2009-10: 33/34

Totals: 607/646 (93.9%)
Last 5 Years: 163/170 (95.9%)
Last 10 Years: 326/340 (95.9%)

Enjoy March Madness.
 

Thanks SS. Looks like you and Lunardi only disagree on VCU/St. Mary's.
 


I'm guessing Alabama and St Mary's in with USC and VCU out.

If Dayton wins, Alabama is out.

Also, my play-in would be VT vs Penn St and Colorado vs Alabama. Maybe I'm wrong but I think St. Mary's is comfortably in the tourney. If Dayton wins, then Clemson replaces Alabama in the play-in game. I'm leaving all non-BCS teams out of the play-in games this year because I think the NCAA wants schools from the big conferences to drum up viewership to prove this new model works. Otherwise, I could see St. Mary's in a play-in game.
 

Looks like SS got 66 of 68 (UAB and Georgia in, VT and Col out) and and he had VCU, who the TV heads are saying 'no one' had. I'm guessing no one did better than 66. Congrats SS.
 


SS: I know that you've said before that you do this for fun more than anything. But you are always either competitive with national prognosticators or better than them. You could make a career out of this. Congrats again!!! You are such an asset to the gopherhole forum.
 


Some final tallies

Thanks everyone. I enjoy doing this.

Here are the final numbers for Jerry Palm (collegerpi.com), Joe Lunardi and my own. All 3 of us missed on Virginia Tech (none of us had UAB in the field), but Seth Greenberg shouldn't cry too much because his squad could have sealed a NCAA bid by simply beating fellow bubblers BC (at home) or Clemson immediately after they beat Duke. They lost both. End of story.

I'm more surprised by Colorado's exclusion than I am about VCU's inclusion, but it's pretty clear (like Penn State two years ago and Virginia Tech last season) that Colorado was left out because of an atrocious nonconference schedule (#325 of 345).

Palm was 35 of 37 on the at-larges. He had St. Mary's and Virginia Tech in the field. ... in their place were UAB and USC,

Lunardi was 34 of 37 on the at-larges. He had Colorado, St. Mary's and Virginia Tech in the field. ... in their place were Georgia, UAB and VCU.

I was 35 of 37 on the at-larges. I had Colorado and Virginia Tech in the field. ... in their place were Georgia and UAB.

Last year (2009-10) Palm was 34 of 34, Lunardi and I were 33 of 34, meaning Palm still holds bragging rights.

Another note. ... way back in early November, JJGopher and I both projected the tournament field. JJ was correct on the 43 of the 68 teams, I had 42 correct.

GOPHERS finish with RPI of 85, SOS of 34, nonconference SOS of 86.
 

Nice job, Hodger. I know we talked about VCU in Indy, and although I only saw them play a couple of times, they passed my uneducated eye test, and they beat George Mason in the Colonial tourney. You were on. Good job.

My sympathy to Seth and VT. I thought they had it when they beat Florida State.

Any rationale for UAB? Their resume was awful, including, I believe, exactly zero wins against the top 50. Ouch. Now watch them get to the second weekend.

Here is my conspiracy theory: The committee leaves out guys like Colorado and VT, demonstrating that there are not enough at large bids, giving them the go ahead to expand to 96. The bubble was very soft this year. It just seems like college basketball, in terms of quality and consistent play, is in decline. Reasons are for another day.

Thanks for the effort.
 



UAB's inclusion

Thanks Holy Man, it's always nice to visit with you at the BTT.

UAB had 1 top-50 win. I suspect UAB got in because it had a good road/neutral record (9-6), 10 top-100 wins (a good number amongst bubble teams) and perhaps most importantly because it was the outright regular-season champion of a decent (C-USA was #8) conference.

A weak resume, indeed, but if the talking heads are going to rip the the Selection Committee for taking UAB & VCU (non-majors), in my opinion they should have been equally vehement in their protests about Clemson. I had Clemson in, but not because the Tigers had done anything particularly impressive.
 

SelectionSunday said:
Thanks Holy Man, it's always nice to visit with you at the BTT.

UAB had 1 top-50 win. I suspect UAB got in because it had a good road/neutral record (9-6), 10 top-100 wins (a good number amongst bubble teams) and perhaps most importantly because it was the outright regular-season champion of a decent (C-USA was #8) conference.

A weak resume, indeed, but if the talking heads are going to rip the the Selection Committee for taking UAB & VCU (non-majors), in my opinion they should have been equally vehement in their protests about Clemson. I had Clemson in, but not because the Tigers had done anything particularly impressive.
Click to expand...

One of the ESPN heads (I think Digger of all people) had it right. The big arguement for expansion was that they needed to let more at-large teams in from mid-majors and a lot of years it was 30/4 etc. towards BCS conference teams. If they'd let Colorado and VT in over VCU and UAB it would have been 32/5. They wouldn't have justified the reason for expansion. They needed to get it to 30/7. Makes as much sense as anything.

Anyway, I don't feel bad for either team, especially not VT, and I think both VCU and UAB will win the play-in games and shut everyone up.
 

howeda7 said:
One of the ESPN heads (I think Digger of all people) had it right. The big arguement for expansion was that they needed to let more at-large teams in from mid-majors and a lot of years it was 30/4 etc. towards BCS conference teams. If they'd let Colorado and VT in over VCU and UAB it would have been 32/5. They wouldn't have justified the reason for expansion. They needed to get it to 30/7. Makes as much sense as anything.

Anyway, I don't feel bad for either team, especially not VT, and I think both VCU and UAB will win the play-in games and shut everyone up.
Click to expand...

Fine, then leave out USC and Clemson in favor of Colorado and VT. People railed on the inclusion of UAB and VCU because they were the obvious crappy selections, but really all of the last 4 in had poorer resumes than Colorado and VT.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom