SelectionSunday
Well-known member
- Joined
- Nov 12, 2008
- Messages
- 24,838
- Reaction score
- 5,199
- Points
- 113
Selection Sunday has finally arrived!
Let’s get right to it, my final Field of 68 projection for the 2022-23 season. I have jotted down a few notes after the projection, as well as my track record since I began projecting at-large qualifiers after the 1991-92 season.
Teams in ALL CAPS BOLD denote the automatic qualifier. NET ranking through March 11 games noted in parentheses.
FIELD OF 68 PROJECTION (March 12, 2023)
America East (1): VERMONT (109)
American (2): Houston (1), MEMPHIS (23)
ACC (5): DUKE (16), Virginia (27), Miami (35), Clemson (60), Pitt (67)
ASUN (1): KENNESAW STATE (115)
Atlantic 10 (1): VCU (53)
Big East (5): UConn (8), MARQUETTE (12), Creighton (17), Xavier (22), Providence (56)
Big Sky (1): MONTANA STATE (103)
Big South (1): UNC-ASHEVILLE (140)
Big Ten (9): PURDUE (5), Indiana (30), Maryland (31), Michigan State (33), Illinois (34), Iowa (39), Rutgers (40), Northwestern (41), Penn State (48)
Big XII (7): TEXAS (7), Kansas (9), Baylor (15), Iowa State (20), Kansas State (24), West Virginia (25), TCU (28)
Big West (1): UCSB (100)
Colonial (1): COLLEGE OF CHARLESTON (51)
Conference USA (1): FAU (13)
Horizon (1): NORTHERN KENTUCKY (154)
Ivy (1): PRINCETON (111)
MAAC (1): IONA (58)
MAC (1): KENT STATE (59)
MEAC (1): HOWARD (214)
Missouri Valley (1): DRAKE (55)
Mountain West (3): SAN DIEGO STATE (14), Utah State (18), Boise State (29)
NEC (1): FAIRLEIGH DICKINSON (301)
OVC (1): SOUTHEAST MISSOURI STATE (242)
Pac 12 (4): UCLA (3), ARIZONA (10), USC (50), Arizona State (66)
Patriot (1): COLGATE (101)
SEC (8): ALABAMA (2), Tennessee (4), Texas A&M (19), Arkansas (21), Kentucky (26), Auburn (32), Missouri (42), Mississippi State (49)
SoCon (1): FURMAN (88)
Southland (1): TEXAS A&M-CORPUS CHRISTI (175)
SWAC (1): TEXAS SOUTHERN (294)
Summit (1): ORAL ROBERTS (36)
Sun Belt (1): LOUISIANA (89)
WCC (2): GONZAGA (6), Saint Mary’s (11)
WAC (1): GRAND CANYON (104)
___________________________
Last 4 In: Rutgers (40), Pitt (67), Clemson (60), (last team in) Providence (56)
First 4 Out: (first team out) NC State (45), Nevada (37), Oklahoma State (43), Wisconsin (80)
Next 4 Out: North Texas (38), North Carolina (46), Oregon (47), Michigan (61)
Non-Power 6 At-Large Bids (4): Houston (1), Saint Mary’s (11), Utah State (18), Boise State (29)
First 4 Automatic Qualifiers: Howard (214), Southeast Missouri (242), Texas Southern (294), Fairleigh Dickinson (301)
BRACKET NOTES
Though there is quite a bit of nuance and “gut feeling” that goes with identifying and ordering the 36 at-large teams (especially for the last few spots in the field), it’s mostly about the numbers. Here are the 9 categories I emphasize to select the at-large teams. Mostly, it mirrors the criteria the Selection Committee uses:
1 Quad 1 wins and winning percentage.
2 Combined Quads 1 & 2 wins and winning percentage.
3 Combined Quads 3 & 4 winning percentage.
4 Winning percentage vs. Quads 1-3 (below .500 is a negative indicator).
5 “Best 3 Wins”: combined NET rank, with added importance given to road and/or neutral site wins.
6 Road/neutral winning percentage.
7 Non-conference SOS (strength of schedule).
8 SOR (strength of record).
9 “Record vs. the Projected Field” – for bubble teams, this is where I turn when it’s crunch time.
With that backdrop, some “Cliffs Notes” scribblings on what swayed me to select or not select teams finishing near my bubble cutline. …
Just Above the Bubble
Mississippi State – 6-9 vs. my projected field. Keeping the Bulldogs out of Dayton (site of First Four) were key non-conference wins over Big East champion Marquette (neutral site) and TCU (home) in the Big XII/SEC Challenge.
USC – 5-5 vs. the projected field. Winning 2 of 3 from rival and fellow bubble team Arizona State + home wins over Auburn and Pac 12 regular season champion UCLA provides the Men of Troy some distance from the First Four.
Arizona State – 4-7 vs. the projected field. The Sun Devils were staunch away from home, going 7-6 in true road games and 12-7 combined in road/neutral games, easily best among all the bubble teams. That included a win @ Pac 12 Tournament champion Arizona on a buzzer-beating shot from beyond half court, as well as a key neutral site non-conference win over Creighton.
Last 4 In
Rutgers – 7-8 vs. the projected field. The Scarlet Knights make the cut on the strength of 5 Quad 1 wins (most among my final bubble teams) and a 10-10 mark vs. Quads 1 & 2 combined. And it’s impossible to ignore three road wins over teams that will play in the NCAA Tournament (Purdue, Northwestern, Penn State). A dreadful #314 non-conference SOS ranking with no non-conference wins of any consequence + a late-season meltdown at The Barn gives me serious pause, but RU’s boatload of quality wins should offset that.
Pitt – 4-7 vs. the projected field. The Panthers sneak into the field buoyed by road wins @ Northwestern (ACC/Big Ten Challenge) and @ ACC regular season champion Miami. Pitt also knocked off Virginia at home.
Clemson – 3-4 vs. the projected field. The Tigers eek into the field on the strength of a 14-6 ACC record that included a home win over ACC Tournament champion Duke. And little did we know at the time that a home win over Penn State in the ACC/Big Ten Challenge would look really good in March. That said, more than anything what swayed me to put the Tigers in the field was a 3-game sweep of fellow ACC bubble team NC State.
Providence (LAST TEAM IN) – 3-8 vs. the projected field. I’ll be honest, there’s not a lot I like about their resume. The Friars are the perfect example of a “home-court hero”, with all three wins vs. the projected field coming at home (Marquette, UConn, Creighton). And they did nothing in non-conference play, losing their three key games (vs. Miami, vs. Saint Louis, @ TCU). Let’s see if this resume has just enough to get them to Dayton, what I’m predicting, but not with a lot of confidence.
First 4 Out
NC State (FIRST TEAM OUT) – 3-8 vs. the projected field. Plain and simple, the Wolfpack only have one Quad 1 win, making them the odd man out among my three ACC bubble teams because they were a combined 0-4 vs. Clemson (0-3) and Pitt (0-1). Hard to justify taking NCSU over either one, especially Clemson. Also worth noting, none of the Wolfpack’s wins vs. the projected field came away from home.
Nevada – 4-4 vs. the projected field. Like Providence, this is a home-court hero. The Pack beat each of the 3 top teams in the Mountain West at home (San Diego State, Boise State, Utah State) but had no road/neutral wins vs. the projected field. Still, those all are good wins that had them looking really solid for an at-large bid. But then a season-ending 3-game losing streak to non-tournament teams Wyoming, UNLV, and San Jose State pushed the Pack to the wrong side of the bubble. If the Selection Committee is determined to add another non-Power 6 at-large team to the field, this is the one they’ll select.
Oklahoma State – 5-12 vs. the projected field. The Cowboys finished the season with an 18-15 record. 6 Quad 1 wins (in 18 opportunities) are a lot for a bubble team, but so are 15 overall losses. That’s where the at-large conversation stopped for me.
Wisconsin – 7-9 vs. the projected field. See above (Oklahoma State). The Badgers had as many Quad 1 wins (6) than any of my bubble teams, but a 17-14 record combined with losing on Weakling Wednesday of the Big Ten Tournament is simply too much to overcome.
Projecting the At-Large Qualifiers (1991-92 through 2022-23)
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
2010-11: 35/37
2011-12: 36/37
2012-13: 36/37
2013-14: 36/36 (perfect)
2014-15: 33/36
2015-16: 32/36
2016-17: 36/36 (perfect)
2017-18: 33/36
2018-19: 34/36
2019-20: Coronavirus-2020
2020-21: 36/37
2021-22: 34/36
2022-23: TBD
TOTALS: 988/1046 (94.5%)
Projecting the At-Larges Head to Head vs. Jerry Palm and Joe Lunardi
Jerry Palm Since Field Expanded to 68: 386/400 (96.5%)
Joe Lunardi Since Field Expanded to 68: 384/400 (96%)
Buzz King Since Field Expanded to 68: 381/400 (95.3%)
Worst 5 At-Large Rankings since 2019 Switch to NET
#77 Rutgers (2022)
#73 Saint John’s (2019)
#72 Wichita (2021)
#70 Michigan State (2021)
#63 Arizona State (2019)
Let’s get right to it, my final Field of 68 projection for the 2022-23 season. I have jotted down a few notes after the projection, as well as my track record since I began projecting at-large qualifiers after the 1991-92 season.
Teams in ALL CAPS BOLD denote the automatic qualifier. NET ranking through March 11 games noted in parentheses.
FIELD OF 68 PROJECTION (March 12, 2023)
America East (1): VERMONT (109)
American (2): Houston (1), MEMPHIS (23)
ACC (5): DUKE (16), Virginia (27), Miami (35), Clemson (60), Pitt (67)
ASUN (1): KENNESAW STATE (115)
Atlantic 10 (1): VCU (53)
Big East (5): UConn (8), MARQUETTE (12), Creighton (17), Xavier (22), Providence (56)
Big Sky (1): MONTANA STATE (103)
Big South (1): UNC-ASHEVILLE (140)
Big Ten (9): PURDUE (5), Indiana (30), Maryland (31), Michigan State (33), Illinois (34), Iowa (39), Rutgers (40), Northwestern (41), Penn State (48)
Big XII (7): TEXAS (7), Kansas (9), Baylor (15), Iowa State (20), Kansas State (24), West Virginia (25), TCU (28)
Big West (1): UCSB (100)
Colonial (1): COLLEGE OF CHARLESTON (51)
Conference USA (1): FAU (13)
Horizon (1): NORTHERN KENTUCKY (154)
Ivy (1): PRINCETON (111)
MAAC (1): IONA (58)
MAC (1): KENT STATE (59)
MEAC (1): HOWARD (214)
Missouri Valley (1): DRAKE (55)
Mountain West (3): SAN DIEGO STATE (14), Utah State (18), Boise State (29)
NEC (1): FAIRLEIGH DICKINSON (301)
OVC (1): SOUTHEAST MISSOURI STATE (242)
Pac 12 (4): UCLA (3), ARIZONA (10), USC (50), Arizona State (66)
Patriot (1): COLGATE (101)
SEC (8): ALABAMA (2), Tennessee (4), Texas A&M (19), Arkansas (21), Kentucky (26), Auburn (32), Missouri (42), Mississippi State (49)
SoCon (1): FURMAN (88)
Southland (1): TEXAS A&M-CORPUS CHRISTI (175)
SWAC (1): TEXAS SOUTHERN (294)
Summit (1): ORAL ROBERTS (36)
Sun Belt (1): LOUISIANA (89)
WCC (2): GONZAGA (6), Saint Mary’s (11)
WAC (1): GRAND CANYON (104)
___________________________
Last 4 In: Rutgers (40), Pitt (67), Clemson (60), (last team in) Providence (56)
First 4 Out: (first team out) NC State (45), Nevada (37), Oklahoma State (43), Wisconsin (80)
Next 4 Out: North Texas (38), North Carolina (46), Oregon (47), Michigan (61)
Non-Power 6 At-Large Bids (4): Houston (1), Saint Mary’s (11), Utah State (18), Boise State (29)
First 4 Automatic Qualifiers: Howard (214), Southeast Missouri (242), Texas Southern (294), Fairleigh Dickinson (301)
BRACKET NOTES
Though there is quite a bit of nuance and “gut feeling” that goes with identifying and ordering the 36 at-large teams (especially for the last few spots in the field), it’s mostly about the numbers. Here are the 9 categories I emphasize to select the at-large teams. Mostly, it mirrors the criteria the Selection Committee uses:
1 Quad 1 wins and winning percentage.
2 Combined Quads 1 & 2 wins and winning percentage.
3 Combined Quads 3 & 4 winning percentage.
4 Winning percentage vs. Quads 1-3 (below .500 is a negative indicator).
5 “Best 3 Wins”: combined NET rank, with added importance given to road and/or neutral site wins.
6 Road/neutral winning percentage.
7 Non-conference SOS (strength of schedule).
8 SOR (strength of record).
9 “Record vs. the Projected Field” – for bubble teams, this is where I turn when it’s crunch time.
With that backdrop, some “Cliffs Notes” scribblings on what swayed me to select or not select teams finishing near my bubble cutline. …
Just Above the Bubble
Mississippi State – 6-9 vs. my projected field. Keeping the Bulldogs out of Dayton (site of First Four) were key non-conference wins over Big East champion Marquette (neutral site) and TCU (home) in the Big XII/SEC Challenge.
USC – 5-5 vs. the projected field. Winning 2 of 3 from rival and fellow bubble team Arizona State + home wins over Auburn and Pac 12 regular season champion UCLA provides the Men of Troy some distance from the First Four.
Arizona State – 4-7 vs. the projected field. The Sun Devils were staunch away from home, going 7-6 in true road games and 12-7 combined in road/neutral games, easily best among all the bubble teams. That included a win @ Pac 12 Tournament champion Arizona on a buzzer-beating shot from beyond half court, as well as a key neutral site non-conference win over Creighton.
Last 4 In
Rutgers – 7-8 vs. the projected field. The Scarlet Knights make the cut on the strength of 5 Quad 1 wins (most among my final bubble teams) and a 10-10 mark vs. Quads 1 & 2 combined. And it’s impossible to ignore three road wins over teams that will play in the NCAA Tournament (Purdue, Northwestern, Penn State). A dreadful #314 non-conference SOS ranking with no non-conference wins of any consequence + a late-season meltdown at The Barn gives me serious pause, but RU’s boatload of quality wins should offset that.
Pitt – 4-7 vs. the projected field. The Panthers sneak into the field buoyed by road wins @ Northwestern (ACC/Big Ten Challenge) and @ ACC regular season champion Miami. Pitt also knocked off Virginia at home.
Clemson – 3-4 vs. the projected field. The Tigers eek into the field on the strength of a 14-6 ACC record that included a home win over ACC Tournament champion Duke. And little did we know at the time that a home win over Penn State in the ACC/Big Ten Challenge would look really good in March. That said, more than anything what swayed me to put the Tigers in the field was a 3-game sweep of fellow ACC bubble team NC State.
Providence (LAST TEAM IN) – 3-8 vs. the projected field. I’ll be honest, there’s not a lot I like about their resume. The Friars are the perfect example of a “home-court hero”, with all three wins vs. the projected field coming at home (Marquette, UConn, Creighton). And they did nothing in non-conference play, losing their three key games (vs. Miami, vs. Saint Louis, @ TCU). Let’s see if this resume has just enough to get them to Dayton, what I’m predicting, but not with a lot of confidence.
First 4 Out
NC State (FIRST TEAM OUT) – 3-8 vs. the projected field. Plain and simple, the Wolfpack only have one Quad 1 win, making them the odd man out among my three ACC bubble teams because they were a combined 0-4 vs. Clemson (0-3) and Pitt (0-1). Hard to justify taking NCSU over either one, especially Clemson. Also worth noting, none of the Wolfpack’s wins vs. the projected field came away from home.
Nevada – 4-4 vs. the projected field. Like Providence, this is a home-court hero. The Pack beat each of the 3 top teams in the Mountain West at home (San Diego State, Boise State, Utah State) but had no road/neutral wins vs. the projected field. Still, those all are good wins that had them looking really solid for an at-large bid. But then a season-ending 3-game losing streak to non-tournament teams Wyoming, UNLV, and San Jose State pushed the Pack to the wrong side of the bubble. If the Selection Committee is determined to add another non-Power 6 at-large team to the field, this is the one they’ll select.
Oklahoma State – 5-12 vs. the projected field. The Cowboys finished the season with an 18-15 record. 6 Quad 1 wins (in 18 opportunities) are a lot for a bubble team, but so are 15 overall losses. That’s where the at-large conversation stopped for me.
Wisconsin – 7-9 vs. the projected field. See above (Oklahoma State). The Badgers had as many Quad 1 wins (6) than any of my bubble teams, but a 17-14 record combined with losing on Weakling Wednesday of the Big Ten Tournament is simply too much to overcome.
Projecting the At-Large Qualifiers (1991-92 through 2022-23)
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
2010-11: 35/37
2011-12: 36/37
2012-13: 36/37
2013-14: 36/36 (perfect)
2014-15: 33/36
2015-16: 32/36
2016-17: 36/36 (perfect)
2017-18: 33/36
2018-19: 34/36
2019-20: Coronavirus-2020
2020-21: 36/37
2021-22: 34/36
2022-23: TBD
TOTALS: 988/1046 (94.5%)
Projecting the At-Larges Head to Head vs. Jerry Palm and Joe Lunardi
Jerry Palm Since Field Expanded to 68: 386/400 (96.5%)
Joe Lunardi Since Field Expanded to 68: 384/400 (96%)
Buzz King Since Field Expanded to 68: 381/400 (95.3%)
Worst 5 At-Large Rankings since 2019 Switch to NET
#77 Rutgers (2022)
#73 Saint John’s (2019)
#72 Wichita (2021)
#70 Michigan State (2021)
#63 Arizona State (2019)
Last edited: