2025-2026 MBB computer projections thread

[NENick]

Wouldn't Duke's plan be to reproduce the BYU game with Boozer in Dybantsa's place?

Completely different players, IMO. Maybe I haven't watched enough of Duke, but Boozer seems like a power forward, dominant inside, who can step out and hit a 3. Not that he can't handle the ball, but they have other players who serve that purpose. Dybantsa seems more able, and more asked to, do everything.

 

[KennyPratt42]

@CycloneEggie not sure why you disagreed with this. It's 100% true.

The committee as a balance check adds up the top 4 seeds in each region based on where they fall on the s-curve. A perfectly balanced bracket for the 1 through 4 seeds add up to 34 for each region. Typically they will fall between 32 and 36. So as an example avoiding conference matchups and teams that met in the regular season along with a preference for putting teams in closer sites could lead to a region of something like 1, 5, 12, and 16. Its not particularly likely they would do that, but is certainly possible. People sometimes assume it will end up with regions of 1/8/9/16, 2/7/10/15, 3/6/11/14, and 4/5/12/13 based on the s-curve, but it almost never works out that way.

 

[cyclones500]

This isn't 100% true. The committee as a balance check adds up the top 4 seeds in each region based on where they fall on the s-curve. A perfectly balanced bracket for the 1 through 4 seeds add up to 34 for each region. Typically they will fall between 32 and 36. So as an example avoiding conference matchups and teams that met in the regular season along with a preference for putting teams in closer sites could lead to a region of something like 1, 5, 12, and 16. Its not particularly likely they would do that, but is certainly possible. People sometimes assume it will end up with regions of 1/8/9/16, 2/7/10/15, 3/6/11/14, and 4/5/12/13 based on the s-curve, but it almost never works out that way.

Good summary. I think only exception in your example, 5 overall can't be placed with #1 overall seed.

I admit I'm not sure how many years that rule has been in place, probably longer than I realize.

 

[KennyPratt42]

Good summary. I think only exception in your example, 5 overall can't be placed with #1 overall seed.

I admit I'm not sure how many years that rule has been in place, probably longer than I realize.

Its getting pretty deep into the weeds, but technically the 1 overall can be placed with the 5 overall in a region. It would require the 1, 6, 7, and 8 teams on the s-curve being from the same conference. This is the language the NCAA puts out:

• No. 2 seeds placed next:
  Assigned in true-seed order, with flexibility to move teams slightly to avoid placing the No. 5 seed in the same region as the overall No. 1.
  Conference-separation rules cannot be compromised.

And here's the conference rules:

Conference Matchup Rules​

• The first four teams from any conference placed on the top four seed lines must be assigned to different regions (unless five or more teams appear on those seed lines).
• Teams from the same conference:
  • Cannot meet before the regional final if they played three or more times during the regular season and conference tournament.
  • Cannot meet before the regional semifinal if they played twice.
  • May meet as early as the second round if they played once or not at all.
• These restrictions may be relaxed if a conference has nine or more teams in the tournament.
• Any principle may be relaxed if two or more of the conference’s teams are among the last four at-large teams in the First Four.
• Top-seeded teams (first four lines) will not be placed where they would face a significant home-crowd disadvantage.

 

[dahliaclone]

The committee as a balance check adds up the top 4 seeds in each region based on where they fall on the s-curve. A perfectly balanced bracket for the 1 through 4 seeds add up to 34 for each region. Typically they will fall between 32 and 36. So as an example avoiding conference matchups and teams that met in the regular season along with a preference for putting teams in closer sites could lead to a region of something like 1, 5, 12, and 16. Its not particularly likely they would do that, but is certainly possible. People sometimes assume it will end up with regions of 1/8/9/16, 2/7/10/15, 3/6/11/14, and 4/5/12/13 based on the s-curve, but it almost never works out that way.

I’m aware

 

[cyclones500]

Its getting pretty deep into the weeds, but technically the 1 overall can be placed with the 5 overall in a region. It would require the 1, 6, 7, and 8 teams on the s-curve being from the same conference. This is the language the NCAA puts out:

• No. 2 seeds placed next:
  Assigned in true-seed order, with flexibility to move teams slightly to avoid placing the No. 5 seed in the same region as the overall No. 1.
  Conference-separation rules cannot be compromised.

And here's the conference rules:

Conference Matchup Rules​

• The first four teams from any conference placed on the top four seed lines must be assigned to different regions (unless five or more teams appear on those seed lines).
• Teams from the same conference:
  • Cannot meet before the regional final if they played three or more times during the regular season and conference tournament.
  • Cannot meet before the regional semifinal if they played twice.
  • May meet as early as the second round if they played once or not at all.
• These restrictions may be relaxed if a conference has nine or more teams in the tournament.
• Any principle may be relaxed if two or more of the conference’s teams are among the last four at-large teams in the First Four.
• Top-seeded teams (first four lines) will not be placed where they would face a significant home-crowd disadvantage.

Thank you for clarification. I probably interpreted the 1v5 within a specific context and not the overall placement rule.

 

[KennyPratt42]

I’m aware

Are you also aware that its not 100% true that the 1 overall can't be with with the 5 overall? The conference matchup rules take precedent.

 

[dahliaclone]

Are you also aware that its not 100% true that the 1 overall can't be with with the 5 overall? The conference matchup rules take precedent.

Yep. Shouldn’t have said 100%. But the chances, as was exactly what the reveal showed this weekend, is very very low. Have a good one.

 

[Cyclonepride]

Not a gambler, but I find these things more accurate than talking head projections as they're paid to be accurate

 

[not-the-manager]

Not a gambler, but I find these things more accurate than talking head projections as they're paid to be accurate

View attachment 168118

I really don't have recency bias, as I'll still pick Houston to do well unless their draw is insane. But it seems crazy to me how much better their odds are than Illinois, Florida, and Iowa State

 

[cyclones500]

Not a gambler, but I find these things more accurate than talking head projections as they're paid to be accurate

View attachment 168118

Looks reasonable to me.

I have a hunch Florida's odds might shift higher as we get closer.

Among many elements that seem to help when it comes to champion potential, if a team has won at least six straight games during season vs. "relevant" competition. This season, I think that applies to U-M, Arizona, Duke, Florida, UConn, Illinois and KU. (Maybe a few others).

That alone doesn't guarantee anything, but I'd guess a majority of recent title-winners had lower consistency throughout entire schedule. If anyone knows more in-depth on that, I'd be curious.

For some reason, I don't always pay attention to that when I make my annual, futile attempt at winning tournament pools. But that's a separate topic altogether.

 

[Cyclonepride]

I really don't have recency bias, as I'll still pick Houston to do well unless their draw is insane. But it seems crazy to me how much better their odds are than Illinois, Florida, and Iowa State

I think that has to be the Sampson factor

 

[CascadeClone]

I really don't have recency bias, as I'll still pick Houston to do well unless their draw is insane. But it seems crazy to me how much better their odds are than Illinois, Florida, and Iowa State

They were in the title game last year. As well as Sampson, as pride noted above.

But agree, the metrics like IL and FL a lot more, and you'd think the money would follow that. I suppose people believe defense wins championships. Even though offense is more important in CBB.

 

[fsanford]

I really don't have recency bias, as I'll still pick Houston to do well unless their draw is insane. But it seems crazy to me how much better their odds are than Illinois, Florida, and Iowa State

I just hope to God ISU is not in Florida's bracket, that front line grabs boards like they were $100 bills floating down from above

That match up would be bad from getting rebounds. Yikes

 

[VeloClone]

Its getting pretty deep into the weeds, but technically the 1 overall can be placed with the 5 overall in a region. It would require the 1, 6, 7, and 8 teams on the s-curve being from the same conference. This is the language the NCAA puts out:

• No. 2 seeds placed next:
  Assigned in true-seed order, with flexibility to move teams slightly to avoid placing the No. 5 seed in the same region as the overall No. 1.
  Conference-separation rules cannot be compromised.

And here's the conference rules:

Conference Matchup Rules​

• The first four teams from any conference placed on the top four seed lines must be assigned to different regions (unless five or more teams appear on those seed lines).
• Teams from the same conference:
  • Cannot meet before the regional final if they played three or more times during the regular season and conference tournament.
  • Cannot meet before the regional semifinal if they played twice.
  • May meet as early as the second round if they played once or not at all.
• These restrictions may be relaxed if a conference has nine or more teams in the tournament.
• Any principle may be relaxed if two or more of the conference’s teams are among the last four at-large teams in the First Four.
• Top-seeded teams (first four lines) will not be placed where they would face a significant home-crowd disadvantage.

Another scenario would be where the 2, 3, 4, & 5 seeds are all from the same conference. The 5 seed has no choice but to be in the overall #1's region since they can't be in a region with one of their conference's other top 4 teams.

 

[dahliaclone]

I just hope to God ISU is not in Florida's bracket, that front line grabs boards like they were $100 bills floating down from above

That match up would be bad from getting rebounds. Yikes

I think they're ultimately gonna end up a 2 seed honestly...and as long as we are a 1/2 seed that's good news for us avoiding them at least until the Elite 8.

 

[KennyPratt42]

I think they're ultimately gonna end up a 2 seed honestly...and as long as we are a 1/2 seed that's good news for us avoiding them at least until the Elite 8.

I agree, that seems pretty likely at this point unless they drop a game somewhat unexpectedly.

I'm hoping to avoid Michigan, Duke, and Florida for as long as possible. I'd also rather not have any rematches (Purdue, St. John's, Iowa, Big 12 teams).

 

[cydnote]

Since everybody is offering their likely/unlikely scenarios, remember that with conference champions getting in and the chaos of the tournament, it's still a possibility we could face three of our buy game opponents in our first three games. Not likely but possible

 

[NENick]

On Bracket Matrix, 10 have ISU as a 1 seed, 2 have them as a 3 seed, the rest as a 2 seed. UCONN as the 4th 1 seed on most, with a couple Houston/Florida.

I think beating TTech pretty much assures a 2. Coupled with a UCONN loss to St. John's tonight should really make ISU as a 1 the most likely scenario.

 

[Sigmapolis]