Friday, February 2, 2018


Pressure point 1:  #1 overall.  Virginia has surpassed Villanova.  It doesn't really matter long-term, but still.
Pressure point 2:  #4 overall, 1 line.  I'm going to say the Big 12 champ will leap an ACC non-champ, most other things being equal. Kansas has better resume depth at the moment over Duke.
Pressure point 3:  #7 overall, 2 line.  Clemson/Auburn/Oklahoma range.  There's some different angles the committee can tackle this from.  I'm going to lean towards Auburn's road record and OU's win over Kansas as differentiating them from Clemson for the time being.
Pressure point 4:  #10 overall, 3 line.  I do think the committee does like to reward dominant teams in relevant conferences, and I think Cincy and Zona both get a resume bump as a reward.
Pressure point 5:  #14 overall, 4 line.  Things get weird behind Tennessee.  Flaws start to become noticeable.  I can be talked in or out of the order of the next few teams here.  One sneaky fact:  TTU's non-con SoS is rallying a bit.  So is WVU's.  So let's be a little gentler on their seed for the time being.
Pressure point 6:  #25 overall, 7 line.  This is where we start to see the bubble slowly creep in.  A few teams mostly safe but with plausible paths to miss the NCAA tourney.  URI and Nevada escape this group and move up to the 6 line.  This is where non-con SoS starts to matter ('sup, Creighton).  Gonzaga is in a weird spot where their conference is shredding up their SoS numbers.  They should be fine, I think.
Pressure point 7:  #30 overall, 8 line.  Every single legitimate business at-large contender can at least flop down 1 Group 1 on the table for their at-large resume.  Except Wichita and Boise.  This situation should resolve itself in due time for Wichita, but still.
Pressure point 8:  #37 overall, 10 line.  This is where the true bubble starts.  Teams with legitimate flaws.  You can argue for almost any order of teams you want to here.
Pressure point 9:  #40 overall, 10 line.  NC State's non-con SoS?  Yikes.  But I can't ignore the signature wins either.  Sigh.

The 1 line:  Virginia, Villanova, Purdue, Kansas
The 2 line:  Duke, Xavier, Auburn, Oklahoma
The 3 line:  Clemson, Arizona, Cincinnati, North Carolina
The 4 line:  Tennessee, Texas Tech, Kentucky, West Virginia
The 5 line:  Michigan St, Ohio St, Seton Hall, Florida
The 6 line:  Rhode Island, Miami, TCU, Nevada
The 7 line:  St Mary's, Gonzaga, Butler, Louisville
The 8 line:  Creighton, Wichita St, Arizona St, Arkansas
The 9 line:  Michigan, Texas, Florida St, Alabama
The 10 line:  Texas A&M, Providence, USC, North Carolina St
The 11 line:  Middle Tennessee, Missouri, Western Kentucky, Houston, Washington
The 12 line:  Boise St, Syracuse, Loyola(Chi), New Mexico St, Buffalo
The 13 line:  William & Mary, Vermont, South Dakota St, East Tennessee St
The 14 line:  Louisiana, UC Santa Barbara, Rider, Belmont
The 15 line:  Montana, Wagner, Wright St, Bucknell
The 16 line:  Penn, Radford, FGCU, New Orleans, Savannah St, Arkansas-Pine Bluff

Next 4 in:
North Carolina St
Middle Tennessee***
Western Kentucky

Last 4 in:
Boise St

Last 4 out:
Virginia Tech
Kansas St

Next 4 out:
Notre Dame

Break it down!:
Big 12 6
Big East 6
B1G 4
Pac-12 4

Preliminary NIT projections:
The 3 line:  St Bonaventure, Temple, South Carolina, BYU
The 4 line:  Nebraska, Utah, Central Florida, Mississippi St
The 5 line:  Wyoming, Oregon, LSU, Oklahoma St
The 6 line:  Memphis, Toledo
---the NIT bubble traditionally falls around this spot (middle of 6 line)
Power programs with bursting bubbles:  Colorado, Boston College, Iowa St, Stanford, Indiana, Northwestern, Penn St

Your way-too-early CBI projections:
Charleston vs. Old Dominion
Northeastern vs. VCU
Furman vs. Georgia St
Bradley vs. Ball St
Murray St vs. Southern Illinois
Northern Kentucky vs. Missouri St
Fresno St vs. UC Davis
South Dakota vs. Utah Valley

Other teams in clear range of the CBI/CIT:  Illinois St, Davidson, Hofstra, Towson, San Diego, Grand Canyon, UAB, Marshall, UNC Greensboro, Wofford, Canisius, Iona, Georgia Southern, UNC Asheville, Oakland, Lipscomb, Stephen F Austin


ILLSC said...

May I ask why Maryland is so close to the cut line? Besides butler win, they have zero

Andrew said...

It's honestly not much more than "well, someone has to be the 5th best team in the Big 10" and that gets them considered more. The committee is human and they'll put a B1G team there by habit.

HenryMuto said...

I think Cincinnati is too high. Great record but 0 wins vs NCAA at large field type teams.

4 quad 1 wins but 0 vs at large type teams (Buffalo, Temple, UCF, UCLA)

So how can you be a 3 seed when you have 0 wins vs the field ?

Makes no sense to me if the committee gives them a protected seed at this time based on 0 wins vs at large field.

They don't play a team that has any shot at an at large bid until after the Feb 11th show so even if they win out until then I want to see what the committee does to me at best they would be a 4 seed but to me if I was handing out the seeds they would a 5 seed on that day.

HenryMuto said...

I really hope the committee gives a bid to the loser of Middle Tenn/Western Kentucky both deserve bids but I feel it won't happen. Western Kentucky has the monster Purdue win and a good SMU win but have 4 quad 3 losses that are killing this team's profile if they only had 1 of those quad 3 losses they would be getting a bid for sure.

Middle Tenn has the great RPI and only 1 quad 3 loss but have no big wins so I doubt they get in.

Sad really both deserve in it isn't easy to win on the road at ODU, UAB and Marshall but these teams get no credit to win those games and get dinged losing them. It's so unfair to say these teams have to go like 17-1 and make the finals then lose to even be considered.

They go 15-3 and they don't even get a look.

HenryMuto said...

Down goes Kansas, Down goes Duke!!!!!!!!!!

ILLSC said...

I think you may be right especially because the 4 teams in are very clearly in. So by nature you assume that there has to be a 5th team near the cut line