Cracketology: Rethinking the Resumes

 

Marquette fans don't have fond memories of UNC & R.J. Davis

Photo by Robert Willett | Raleigh News & Observer

Today our focus will again be on the bubble. After a week of reviewing resumes and considering what the Selection Committee will likely prioritize, we have made some major bubble changes. Many are the unfortunate type because some teams we'd like to see in the field (Boise State, UC Irvine) just might not have enough polish on their resumes, while other teams we'd rather not see in (North Carolina, Oklahoma) have some major advantages. Let's dig in.

Last Four Byes: 39-West Virginia, 40-Georgia, 41-Indiana, 42-San Diego State

Currently, our last at-large team comes in at #47 on the S-Curve, which means any resume metric inside the top-47 meets at-large qualification. Collectively, these four teams have 11/12 resume metrics inside the top-47, with only Indiana's SOR (49) on the outside. All of them have at least .500 records in Quadrants 1-3 with at least 3 Q1 wins and 1 Q1A win. For whatever Bracket Matrix is worth, they also all show up in at least 87/92 brackets there as of this writing. If there are bid thieves, these teams could end up in trouble, but for the moment they look fairly safe.

Last Four In: 44-Arkansas, 45-North Carolina, 46-Oklahoma, 47-Xavier

Collectively, these four teams have 10/12 resume metrics inside the top-47. The outlier is KPI for both North Carolina (50) and Xavier (59). Arkansas and Oklahoma are the two safest for selection. While Oklahoma gets knocked for their 5-12 SEC record and 1 road win, those aren't official criteria and their 13-0 non-con record along with 5 neutral court wins help offset those issues. Bracket Matrix is positive on both of these teams, with 85 including Arkansas and 66 including Oklahoma. Both also boast 5 Q1 wins and mulitple Q1A wins.

North Carolina and Xavier are a little different, mostly because of only having 1 Q1 win apiece. However, at the Top-16 reveal, we covered how SOR and WAB were the best predictors of seed, and both of these teams are inside the top-46 in those metrics. Further, they both have just 1 loss outside Q1, so while their Q1 records are poor, their winning overall records in Q1-3, solid resume metrics, and backing that up with predictive averages inside the top-40 give them enough to be selected. One other note for Xavier, they have 3 wins over projected non-bubble at-large teams (Marquette, Creighton, UConn). Bracket Matrix doesn't like these teams as much, with just 29 including Xavier and 20 including UNC, but these are the types of teams that the Selection Committee is more likely to take on historical precedent. Essentially, these teams have no fatal flaws and just enough to get them into Dayton.

First Four Out: Ohio State, Texas, Boise State, Wake Forest

Taking a step back and rethinking things, these teams definitely break into two clear categories. The fatal flaw of Q1-3 record is harmful for Ohio State (11-13) and Texas (10-13) despite having some great wins at the top of their resumes. They also both have 2/3 resume metrics outside the top-47. Ohio State is in 89/92 brackets, so it would surprise most if they are left out, but Texas shows up in just 17 on Bracket Matrix. If they win this weekend and in their conference tournament openers they might have a shot to get back in the mix, but for now they are on the outside looking in.

Boise State's biggest problem is all of their resume metrics are 52 or below. I love their wins over St. Mary's and Clemson, but I'm not sure the Committee will put them in because of those. Bracket Matrix has the Broncos in 34/92 brackets. If I were the one voting, the Broncos would be in, but in terms of predicting what the Selection Committee will do, I think they'll be out.

I was surprised Wake Forest landed this high in consideration. Having 2/3 resume metrics inside the top-47 helped. They also have a winning Q1-3 record and more Q1 wins than North Carolina or Xavier, but like UNC have just one win against a projected non-bubble at-large team. Wake is not in any of the Bracket Matrix entrants right now, but I think they still have a shot, though any bid thieves would likely end that chance. If it comes down to one win between UNC and Wake, the edge goes to UNC who is better in every team sheet metric than the Demon Deacons despite Wake's 1-point home win over the Tar Heels.

Also Considered: Nebraska, UC Irvine

We looked at more teams than these two, but these two tumbled the furthest so I wanted to address them. Nebraska is 11-13 in Q1-3, every team sheet metric is outside the top-47, and despite some nice quality wins, there just isn't enough good to outweigh the bad. They are 15-5 in Q1-3, have 1 Q1A win, and lead the nation with 13 road wins. However, WAB and SOR are both designed to equalize resumes and they are 54 or lower in each. Maybe their 43 KPI gives them a shot, but their predictive average (80.7) would be the second lowest ever included. Like Boise, I would vote for them, but based on historical precedent, I don't think the Committee will put them in without an automatic bid.

Bids Thieved: Gonzaga, VCU, Drake, UC San Diego

If we see these teams that are currently the NET leaders in their respective leagues lose in their conference tournaments, I feel good about the first three making it in. Gonzaga and Drake both have all resume metrics inside the top-47. From a seeding perspective, Gonzaga's predictive average (9.3) would push them higher up the seed line than Drake's (66.3) would but I think both of them have enough in terms of resume quality, Q1-3 records, and Q1 wins to get in. VCU has 2/3 resume metrics in the top-47 and with a 12-4 record in Q1-3 and strong predictives (28.7) I think they get in, though they might be sent to Dayton again. Ram fans may not object to that, given their history.

UC San Diego, on the other hand, I don't feel so good about. I moved them down to the 12-line today and I think if they fall in the Big West tournament, they will be in trouble. All 3 resume metrics are outside the top-47 and while they have the Q1-3 record and Q1 wins, this is the kind of team that tends to get left out. The other problem is if they lose again in the Big West Tournament, it won't be a Q1 game (UC Irvine is Q2). I strongly advise they win their automatic bid.

So that's the bubble. Here's what you can expect from Cracked Sidewalks in the next week as Selection Sunday draws closer:

March 10: Scrambled Eggs - Phil and Joe will wrap up the regular season and look ahead to the Big East Tournament.

March 12: Dreams & Nightmares - our annual piece that looks at which teams Marquette fans would most and least want to see in their pod come Selection Sunday. This piece accurately picked Vermont as a dream scenario in 2023 and Colorado as a nightmare (single possession game in the final minute).

March 15: Contingency Time - On the eve of Selection Sunday, most of the field will be set and most teams will be done playing. This should be pretty close to what our final projections will look like.

March 16: Selection Sunday - We'll provide a last update once we have a better sense of conference tournament champions, bid thieves, and any last minute changes the Selection Committee may take into account.

March 17: Scrambled Eggs: Phil and Joe are back to talk about the bracket and their expectations for the NCAA Tournament.

Here's the current S-Curve and bracket:

Multibid Leagues

SEC: 13

Big 10: 9

Big 12: 8

Big East: 5

ACC: 4

Mountain West: 3

WCC: 2

A Week That Went As It Should

 Finally #mubb had a "normal" week. #ScrambledEggs is back to generally overview the week that was and talk about the challenges of the week to come. We chat about some of the performance against Providence and Georgetown and what it means for the rest of the season. We then chat about the UCONN and St Johns games from a basketball perspective. We also get a little misty eyed about senior day and the end of the regular season. Lastly we spend some time talking about seeding. As always, enjoy!

 

 

https://mcdn.podbean.com/mf/web/eutbk9d5xzyuhxg7/Eggs_2025_March_2bvmyy.mp3

 

 

Cracketology: Maddening March

 

Marquette's win over Maryland in November helped tilt a seeding decision

Photo by Nick Wass | AP Photo

As we unveil our first bracket of March, there are a number of conundrums that start at the top of the field and carry on all the way to the bubble. Today I'll talk my way through these decisions and the tilting points that made the difference. One note, I'm not including the NET of the teams compared, because we only use the NET as a grouping tool for the Quadrants.

The Final 1-Seed

In the final minute of Tennessee's comeback win against Alabama on Saturday, the announcers proclaimed that a 1-seed was on the line. While Auburn, Duke, and Houston seem very solid as 1-seeds at the moment, it's close between Tennessee, Alabama, and Florida for the last 1-seed. Let's look at the comparative resumes:

In terms of overall record, Florida edges Tennessee and Alabama. The resume average favors Alabama, the predictive average favors Florida, but the total metric average is separated by only 0.5 (with Alabama in the lead). Where things start to separate is in the next categories. In terms of challenging themselves, Alabama stands out with their NCSOS of 11. Not only did Alabama schedule multiple high-major opponents, they also had Arkansas State, McNeese, and South Dakota State, all of whom lead their respective leagues in NET.

In the Quadrants, Alabama and Tennessee are tied with 10 wins, with the slight win percentage advantage to the Volunteers. But Alabama's 17 Quadrant 1+2 wins are more than either of the other two and second only to #1 overall seed Auburn. Alabama also leads in Q1A victories, while having the fewest games played in the bottom two quadrants, reinforcing their schedule strength. Looking at the best results, while both Alabama and Tennessee have 6 Q1 wins, Tennessee's three best wins come at home while Alabama has five Q1A wins away from home.

Despite yesterday's loss, Alabama remains on the top line, relegating Tennessee and Florida to the 2-line despite having resumes that are clearly worthy of 1-seeds.

The Final 2-Seed

As tough as the top line decision is, the fight for the last 2-seed is even closer. Michigan State is clearly deserving of the #7 overall seed, but their win over Wisconsin put the Badgers in a dogfight with St. John's, Iowa State, and Texas Tech. All of these teams look more like 3-seeds, but one of them has to land on the 2-line.

St. John's record jumps ahead of the rest. The Red Storm are level with Wisconsin in resume average while Texas Tech and Iowa State are far ahead in the predictive average. It's worth mentioning that during the Top-16 Reveal it was the resume average that was the better seed predictor than the predictive average. The overall metric average favors Wisconsin.

Looking at the Quadrants, a few things stand out. First, Wisconsin, Texas Tech, and Iowa State all have 6 Q1 wins, though Texas Tech having 5 in Q1A jumps off the page. St. John's lags behind here with 3 Q1 wins. However, it's the totality of the resume that matters. St. Johns' has no losses outside Q1 while the other three all have losses outside the top quadrant. The two that stood out the most were St. John's overall quality against Texas Tech's 5 Q1A wins.

So why do we have St. John's ahead of the Red Raiders? In 2023, we saw Marquette get a 2-seed as the Big East Champions despite having 3-seed metrics. St. John's is the only team here that has secured a league crown. That coupled with a better record and metrics than that Marquette team shows they have a 2-seed profile despite lagging in a few categories.

Marquette's Seed

The Golden Eagles come in at #21 overall, the first 6-seed. They land in between a pair of Big 10 teams in Oregon and Maryland. They represent the turn between the 5-seeds and 6-seeds, but are a good example of evaluating wildly different resumes.

Oregon's resume average leads the way but the Ducks lag significantly in the predictives. While the overall average for Marquette and Maryland are very close, Oregon's predictive disadvantage feels like a definite negative mark for them. However, they also have the most Q1 and Q1+2 wins and the best winning percentage in those quadrants. They also have more Q1A wins than the other two combined. Oregon's early season wins really stand out here and push them ahead. As with Alabama and St. John's, we're looking closely at the resume average and the comparison here would be teams like 2022 Wisconsin and Providence who were seeded higher than their overall metric average despite lagging predictive numbers.

So why does Marquette finish ahead of Maryland? These teams are very close. Marquette wins in resume average, Maryland wins in predictive. Maryland has one more Q1 win and one fewer Q2 loss, but the teams have the same 11-7 Q1+2 record and two Q1A wins. In terms of challenging themselves, Marquette's NCSOS stands out significantly. Comparing their best wins is where this is truly decided. Both teams beat Wisconsin at home. Maryland also notched a road win at Illinois while Marquette picked up a road win at...Maryland! I rarely like to use head-to-head because most teams in different conferences don't play each other, but when it's this close, they played head-to-head, and the road team won the game it's enough to tilt it in their favor.

Fatal Flaws & the Bubble

The quality on the bubble isn't close to what we see on the top seed lines, so we are first going to highlight some of the trends that have historically been disqualifying:

• Less than +4 win vs loss differential: Typically, teams with fewer than four more wins than losses are unlikely to earn at-large bids. So 16-13 teams like Ohio State and Texas shouldn't feel secure.
• Quadrant 1 Wins: The worst Q1 record to ever make the field was 1-6 for 2023 NC State. This feels like it may be tested this year with teams like Baylor, Xavier, North Carolina, and Cincinnati all under consideration.
  
• Record below .500 in Quadrants 1, 2, and 3 combined: Rocco Miller calls these "meaningful games" and while this is historically a difficult obstacle to overcome, the sheer quantity of teams on the bubble with Q1-3 records from 11-12 Nebraska to 10-13 Ohio State will likely lead to this being broken.
• Fewer than 2 road wins: No team has ever made the field as an at-large without at least 2 true road wins. Georgia just secured a second with their win at Texas but Oklahoma sits on the bubble with a 1-7 road record.
• Sub-300 NCSOS: Weak non-conference schedules are harmful to a resume, but particularly so for teams on the bubble. If a team's NCSOS is full of cupcakes, they'd better leave no doubt in terms of deserving inclusion. Currently Vanderbilt has risen above the bubble despite this.
  

The problem this year is many teams have a fatal flaw, or multiple fatal flaws, and are still strongly in the mix for inclusion simply because you have to put 68 teams in the field. In addition, some teams with fatal flaws have so much quality in terms of wins that it's hard to leave them out even with their flaws considered. We'll start with the last six teams in the field and the reasoning behind their inclusion:

 

• Boise State: The Broncos non-con wins over St. Mary's and Clemson have aged very well. Their record and quadrant breakdowns are adequate. The resume average is the biggest question mark, but they do well enough in every other category to be included.
  
• Georgia: This is a team clearly playing their way into the field. Georgia's Q1-3 and NCSOS are less than ideal, but wins over Florida, Kentucky, St. John's, and Texas, the latter two away from  home, are enough to get them into the field.
• Arkansas: I'm not overly comfortable with having this team in, but everything on their resume is just good enough. Wins over Michigan and Kentucky away from home bolster their case, but with a 10-12 record in Q1-3 they have work to do. The Razorbacks need to keep winning to get in.
• Baylor: The Bears are the yo-yo team right now, going from in to out to in over the past week. The positive is they are 18-2 outside of Q1A, but when you get 11 tries and only one win, it isn't very convincing. The worst predictive average to be left out was 2022 Oklahoma being out at 32.7, which gives Baylor just enough to lift them in.
• Ohio State: The 10-13 record in Q1-3 is abysmal, and 16-13 overall should be disqualifying. Wins over Kentucky and Purdue away from home are elite and just enough to get them in over teams that don't have comparable wins. They likely need to win out and get at least one win during Championship Week to have any breathing room.
• UC Irvine: The Anteaters have a lot to like. While they only played one Q1 game, it was a Q1A road win at UC San Diego. Their 13-5 record in Q1-3 is very good and their 12 road wins are tied for the most in the country. The biggest negatives are three losses in Q3 and a predictive average that would be the worst in at-large history (81.3 for 2022 Wyoming). But with as much good as they have, I like them to be a surprise pick in Dayton.

Next we'll move to the first five teams out. There are a couple other resumes I'm still looking at, but these felt like the most serious options. All of them have at least one fatal flaw and simply not enough quality in terms of their wins to overcome them.

• Nebraska: The 'Huskers disqualifying 11-12 record in Q1-3 is comparable with some teams that are in, but two losses in Q3 and wins that just aren't on par with the other high-major at-large bubble teams keeps them on the outside looking in.
• Oklahoma: Having both a losing Q1-3 record and only one road win is a double-whammy. The Sooners need to win their final game at Texas to have a real shot. Conference record isn't supposed to be a factor, but sitting at 4-12 in the SEC is a real eyesore if they can't add wins.
• Xavier: The Musketeers have done well to get back on the bubble, and while they don't have any fatal flaws, there's no real there there. The win at Marquette is nice but they've done little else away from home. I fear the consecutive road losses at St. John's, Creighton, and Villanova may have cost them a bid before their winning streak began.
• North Carolina: 10 of the 11 Tarheel losses are in Q1 and they do have a winning record in Q1-3. The NCSOS is great, but the argument "we only lose to good teams" isn't as good as showing a tendency to beat good teams. UNC's Athletic Director Bubba Cunningham is the Selection Committee chair, but they need to beat Duke to get into the field.
• Cincinnati: The Bearcats don't have a great resume, mostly based on their Q2 work. Their only Q1 win is over BYU and their only other win over the field is Baylor at home. They just don't have enough substance to the resume for inclusion.
  

Let's look at the full S-Curve and bracket:

Multibid Leagues

SEC: 12

Big 10: 10

Big 12: 8

Big East: 4

Mountain West: 4

ACC: 3

Big West: 2

WCC: 2