NCAA – Bracket Projections v6.0

National Seeds

#1 Seeds

1 – North Carolina – ACC
2 – UCLA – Pac-12*
3 – Stanford – Pac-12
4 – Penn State – Big Ten*

#2 Seeds

5 – Florida – SEC
6 – Florida State – ACC*
7 – West Virginia – Big XII*
8 – Texas A&M – SEC*

#3 Seeds

9 – Notre Dame – ACC
10 – Virginia – ACC
11 – Texas Tech – Big XII
12 – Washington – Pac-12

#4 Seeds

13 – South Carolina – SEC
14 – Pepperdine – WCC
15 – Wisconsin – Big Ten
16 – UCF – AAC*

Seed Candidates

17 – Arizona – Pac-12
18 – Kentucky – SEC
19 – Washington State – Pac-12
20 – UConn – AAC
21 – Cal – Pac-12
22 – Kansas – Big XII
23 – Virginia Tech – ACC
24 – DePaul – Big East*
25 – La Salle – Atlantic 10*

Above The Bubble

26 – Clemson – ACC
27 – Auburn – SEC
28 – South Florida – AAC
29 – Colgate – Patriot*
30 – Texas – Big XII
31 – BYU – WCC*
32 – Oklahoma State – Big XII
33 – Michigan – Big Ten
34 – Missouri – SEC
35 – Rutgers – Big Ten

The Bubble

36 – Arizona State – Pac-12
37 – Georgetown – Big East
38 – Utah – Pac-12
39 – TCU – Big XII
40 – Georgia – SEC
41 – Alabama – SEC
42 – San Diego State – Mountain West*
43 – San Diego – WCC
44 – Colorado – Pac-12

One-Bid Conferences

45 – Florida Gulf Coast – Atlantic Sun*
46 – Harvard – Ivy*
47 – Buffalo – MAC*
48 – Illinois State – Missouri Valley*
49 – Northeastern – Colonial*
50 – North Texas – Conference USA*
51 – Stephen F. Austin – Southland*
52 – South Alabama – Sun Belt*
53 – Samford – Southern*
54 – Liberty – Big South*
55 – Montana – Big Sky*
56 – Monmouth – MAAC*
57 – Hartford – America East*
58 – Seattle – WAC*
59 – Cal Poly – Big West*
60 – Valparaiso – Horizon*
61 – Fairleigh Dickinson – NEC*
62 – Denver – Summit*
63 – SIU Edwardsville – Ohio Valley*
64 – Howard – SWAC*

Bubbles Burst

-Boston University
-Arkansas
-Memphis
-Ole Miss
-Boston College
-Minnesota
-Hofstra

First Five Out of The Bubble Zone

-Santa Clara
-Duke
-Oklahoma
-Miami (OH)
-USC

Multiple Bid Conferences

9 – Pac-12
8 – SEC
6 – ACC
6 – Big XII
4 – Big Ten
3 – AAC
3 – WCC
2 – Big East

14 thoughts on “NCAA – Bracket Projections v6.0

  1. KC

    Hey Chris…Great stuff as always, however, help me understand the weighting of records vs RPI. Specifically, I am trying to get my fingers around how USC is on your first five out when they currently stand alone in 5th in the Pac12 ahead of Arizona (who is a potential seed and got THROTTLED by USC), Cal, Colorado and Arizona State. I get the strength of out of conference schedule left a little to be desired, but USC is 4-4 in the best conference in the country and 10-5-2 overall. 4 of the 5 losses were 1 goal games. Thanks for always putting in the hard work and bringing some light to what goes on inside the Tournament committees heads
    Cheers

    Reply
    1. Chris Henderson Post author

      Pacific and Arkansas-Pine Bluff are sinking their RPI like an anchor. Having really bad RPI teams on your resume will crush you every time. If they get on the bubble, they’ve got a good shot of getting in, but they probably need at least one more win down the stretch.

      Reply
  2. WES

    I noticed you changed from LBSU to Cal Poly for your BIg West pick…can you give some insight?
    Also…if LBSU doesn’t win the confernece tourney do they have a chance to get in with their RPI?

    Reply
    1. Chris Henderson Post author

      Cal Poly is currently leading the Big West standings.

      Long Beach State doesn’t have a shot at an at-large bid with their RPI.

      Reply
  3. A-Sun

    Hi Chris- Great stuff as always. At 15-3-0 With an RPI of 37 and wins over # 21 LaSalle (Away) and # 23 Arizona and losses to #4 Texas A&M and # 11 South Carolina how close would FGCU be with a win in the A-Sun SF game and a draw with a loss in PK’s in the final to getting an at-large? Also- Win out and can they escape the UCF-Florida-Florida State first round in state death trap? Thanks!

    Reply
    1. Chris Henderson Post author

      I think they’ll be on the bubble if they don’t get the auto bid, it’s just a matter of who’ll be there with them. They really need to root for La Salle and Arizona the rest of the way. The better their results, the better FGCU’s odds. I’d probably put them about 20-25% right now.

      Given their resume, you’d hope they can avoid a seeded team. With South Florida looking like an increasingly likely at-large team, it wouldn’t shock me if they ended up as FGCU’s first round opponent.

      Reply
  4. nowayjose

    BYU has won 11 in-a-row and have out-scored their opponents something like 36-6 during that span.

    If they finish the season on a 14-game wining streak (which would include a win over Pepperdine on the road), is it enough for BYU to get a seed?

    Reply
  5. Soccer Dad

    What are your thoughts about the current state of the program at University of Portland? They obviously will not be making the postseason this year. Do you think it is time for a coaching change?

    Reply
    1. Chris Henderson Post author

      Considering they won the WCC title last year and in three of the last five before this season, I’m guessing he’s going to get cut some slack for one bad season.

      Reply
  6. sec

    I know you’ve been focused on seeding and the bubble watch for some time, and that makes sense as we are getting close to the Big Dance. However, can’t the conference tournaments change everything? For exampel, if UVA beats UNC and then FSU, for example, in the ACC tournament, how are they not a No. 1 seed? That’s a big swing, to go from a No. 3 to No. 1 seed in two matches. Anyway, not criticizing your efforts at all, just saying that there is a lot to be done and said before the NCAA puts up the bracket.

    Unrelatedly, I’m interested to see your post-season NWSL draft projections, Big Board, etc. In that regard, I know that consistency should count for a lot — thus, it does make sense to see how players perform over the course of a full season or multiple seasons. Yet, at the same time, I feel as though results against weaker sides should be thrown out the window when evaluating whether a player can play at the next level. And a huge focus should be given to just a handful of big matches against elite talent.

    Take Jazmine Reeves (who you rated very highly before the draft). A very good 2013 — All-ACC, etc. etc. But the best measure was her performances against the handful of top-10 teams in the biggest matches, and she played really well against UVA, FSU, and Notre Dame (who featured top defenders, if not a top 10 team), including in ACC Tournament and NCAA tournament games. So I feel like talent evaluations should ignore the performances against weak ACC teams or non-conference foes, and focus on just the handful of big matches. If I were an NWSL scout, I’d basically watch just the Elite Eight and College Cup matches, and a few conference tournament finals, etc., and develop a draft board from that, and then add in other players from other schools after that. Your thoughts on the “consistency” versus “big match impact” when evaluating players?

    Reply
    1. Chris Henderson Post author

      Well, obviously, the conference tournaments are going to change everything up. I’m not projecting forward, I’m just basing seedings and selections based on everyone’s resume to that point. If Virginia does win the ACC Tournament, they’d have a great shot at a #1 seed.

      Big match impact obviously matters a lot, and it’s a reason why I try to keep track of goals scored against RPI Top 50/100 teams for 10+ goal scorers. Less quantifiable for the likes of defenders and goalkeepers, but I still think pro teams are paying attention towards the back end of the NCAA Tournament. Still, even if players do show up in big games, they need an element of consistency to avoid a boom/bust cycle that will drive coaches insane. The best players are going to be those who show up every match but bring a little something extra for the top fixtures.

      Reply
    1. Chris Henderson Post author

      No clue until the field gets a little more finalized. Given the imbalance of teams in the West and the East, they may well get someone from the East Coast shipped to them.

      Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *