The 2023 Best Available Bracket

What if every one-bid league autobid went to the actual best team?

Last month, I published College Hoop Highway 5: Requiem for a Double Ladder, in which I laid out my case for why all perennial one-bid leagues should use the double ladder format for their conference tournaments.

In case you haven’t watched that¹ and/or are unfamiliar with the concept, the double ladder is the format most infamously used by the WCC that gives the top two teams byes all the way to the semifinals. It’s most helpful when your league (a) has one or two teams that are clearly stronger than everybody else, and (b) these teams are not already in contention for an at-large bid. The WCC fails (b), so they really shouldn’t be using the double ladder, but when it’s done correctly, it looks like this.

The Southland Conference has used the double ladder since 2013.

In my video, I discuss the dichotomy between playoff structures that allow the best teams the best chances at winning and those that allow for the underdogs to make a little noise, ultimately concluding that the double ladder does both better than a standard bracket. The Southland’s tournament this year is perhaps the best possible example of this: the 7- and 8-seeds both won multiple games, but the 1- and 2-seeds still ended up facing off for the title.

A large part of my argument for implementing the double ladder in all one-bid leagues was that it’s good for college basketball that the best teams represent these conferences because it creates more chaos in March Madness by making upsets more likely. March Madness chaos is practically half the selling point of this sport, so we might as well capitalize on it!

How would this year’s bracket change if every one-bid league was represented by its worthiest team? For this piece, I sought to find out.

Clarifications

I want to make one thing clear right off the bat: I don’t mean to denigrate any of the teams from one-bid leagues who did make the NCAA Tournament, even if they’re not who I would have liked to see represent their conference. March Madness is the greatest time of the year; every team who gets the chance to participate should celebrate the hell out of it and in no way do I intend to rain on their parade.

Additionally, this is not an advocation for the end of conference tournaments. I go into a bit more detail on why conference tournaments are good in the video, but for the purposes of this exercise, I’ll just state that the regular season champion would not be the best representative for every conference. Out of 22 one-bid leagues this year,² I believe eight of them would have been best off sending someone other than their regular season champion to the Big Dance. That’s more than a third!

Third, despite my waxing poetic about double ladder brackets, I’m not trying to determine what would happen if every one-bid league used this format. Lower-seeded teams are still bound to win some conference tournaments regardless of format because college basketball is a sport of high variance. In fact, the OVC used the double ladder this year, as they have almost every year since 2011,³ and still gave the autobid to their 5-seed. It’s impossible to tell who will win any given tournament. I’m simply trying to determine the best team to represent each one-bid league in March Madness.

Finally and most importantly, the Round of 64 has already been played in full at the time of this publication. We’ve already gotten to see which one-bid leagues pulled off upsets and one of them is a team I’m going to assert was not their conference’s worthiest representative. This should be obvious, but it isn’t: winning or losing a game in the field of 68 changes nothing about whether you should have made it in the first place. This logic is most annoyingly used for at-large bids; people call 11-seeds frauds if they lose a coin flip First Four game and they say that actually Syracuse/Michigan did deserve a bid with their horrendous résumé because look! They made it to the Sweet Sixteen! These are fallacies. Don’t fall for them!

But how do we crown a “worthiest” representative? Is it whoever has the best predictive metrics and, thus, who would likely face the shortest odds in Vegas? Is it the team that’s been battle-tested the most and has the best résumé? Personally, I think the answer is somewhere in the middle.

Methodology

Let’s use the Southland as an example again. Regular season champion and 1-seed Texas A&M–Corpus Christi (TAMUCC) entered the conference tournament at #176 in KenPom and #180 in NET, while 2-seed Northwestern State entered at #211 and #200, respectively. But Northwestern State had something TAMUCC didn’t: quality wins. They won at TCU, a 6-seed in the NCAA Tournament, in November, and followed it up with wins at Stephen F. Austin and vs. Southern Miss in December. All three of these wins are more impressive than TAMUCC’s best win…at Northwestern State.

The difference between #176 and #211 is pretty negligible, so despite having somewhat worse metrics than TAMUCC, I think Northwestern State would have been the Southland’s best representative in March Madness on account of having obviously the best résumé. I likely would not still think this if they were instead, say, #311 in KenPom, but it’s also nearly impossible to stay that low in predictive metrics if you’re so often winning games you shouldn’t.

So that’s our goal here. We’re not necessarily trying to send the most efficient team or the one with the most Quad 1 wins. We’re trying to send the team that’ll make their power conference NCAA Tournament opponent lose the most sleep.

---

Let’s start with the conferences I think got it right.

Bullseyes

Atlantic 10: (1) VCU

VCU rose above (2) Dayton and (3) Saint Louis in metrics, finishing #56 in KenPom to their #79 and #95, respectively. They’re the only team of the three without a Q1 win, but they have the highest volume of quality wins when you include Q2. Saint Louis has the conference’s best win of the season (home vs. Memphis), but Dayton’s only Q1 win came by beating VCU on the road. VCU returned the favor in Dayton, but it was only a Q2 game for them because of the metric disparity.

Missouri Valley: (2) Drake

(1) Bradley won the regular season title by a game because Drake somehow got swept by Missouri State, but the teams were roughly equivalent in KenPom when the conference tournament began and Drake had a much better top win (vs. Mississippi State on a neutral court in Lincoln).

Big Sky: (2) Montana State

(1) Eastern Washington started 16-0 in conference play but dropped their final two games, including a home loss to Montana State. They’d beaten Montana State on the road earlier in the year and the two were nearly identical in KenPom when the conference tournament began, but Montana State had more impressive non-conference wins, including at Southern Utah.

MAC: (2) Kent State

This league’s only Q1 win of the season came from its second-worst team: Central Michigan won at Michigan in December and proceeded to go 5-13 in conference play, missing the conference tournament entirely.

You could very easily argue for (1) Toledo here; they beat UAB on a neutral court in Philadelphia and also won at Vermont. Kent State doesn’t have any wins that good but their non-conference slate was defined by what they almost did: within the span of a week and a half, they lost by just five at Houston, holding one of the nation’s best offenses to just 49 points, and then lost by seven at Gonzaga, keeping the contest close throughout and leading with under three minutes to go. Kent State also had better metrics, so if I’m a 4- or 5-seed, I’m way more scared of them.

SoCon: (1) Furman

None of the SoCon’s top three teams — Furman, (2) Samford, and (3) UNC Greensboro — pulled off any marquee non-conference wins, and they all finished within a game of each other in the standings, so the nod stays with Furman, the best team in metrics by a decent margin (#89 in KenPom to UNC Greensboro’s #115 and Samford’s #134).

Horizon: (4) Northern Kentucky

That’s right, a 4-seed won their conference tournament and I think the league is best off for it.

Our first consideration is that these standings were even tighter than the SoCon’s; (1) Youngstown State won the league, but 2-4 were only a game back, and Northern Kentucky only finished so low because they lost the group tiebreaker to (2) Milwaukee and (3) Cleveland State.

Of this group of four, Northern Kentucky was the only team to win a Q2 game (home vs. Cincinnati) and the only team to finish with a winning record in Q3. Youngstown State was better in metrics (#119 in KenPom to Northern Kentucky’s #177 at conference tournament time), but they didn’t play a single Q1 or Q2 game prior to Selection Sunday, so it’s hard to tell how much of their metric strength came from dominating weak opposition. Northern Kentucky is the somewhat surer thing.

Big South: (1) UNC Asheville

Like Northern Kentucky in the Horizon, UNC Asheville was the only team in the Big South to win a Q1 game (at UCF) or finish with a winning record in Q3. They were also the only team to finish with a positive KenPom AdjEM. No one else is truly worth considering.

MAAC: (1) Iona

Iona was the best metric team in the MAAC by a wide margin, as they entered the conference tournament at #77 in KenPom while (2) Rider and (3) Quinnipiac were the only other teams above #200 (at #197 and #174, respectively). Rider won at Iona for the conference’s only Q1 win of the year, but that just emphasizes how Iona was the team to beat.

Summit: (1) Oral Roberts

Barf. The conference’s best win actually belongs to (2) South Dakota State, who won at Boise State in November, but Oral Roberts went undefeated in league play and was the best team in metrics by roughly the same margin that Iona was in the MAAC.

America East: (1) Vermont

Metrically, it was pretty close between Vermont and (2) UMass Lowell all year, but Vermont’s narrow win at Colgate in December was the league’s best win of the season, and they also nearly won at USC in November. Sun rise, sun set, Vermont win America East.

Patriot: (1) Colgate

Colgate won this league by six games. Next.

NEC: (2) Fairleigh Dickinson

Fairleigh Dickinson didn’t even win the NEC Tournament, but actual winner (1) Merrimack is ineligible for the postseason because they’re still transitioning to Division I. Even disregarding that, I think Fairleigh Dickinson was the correct representative, as their metrics were more or less identical to Merrimack’s⁴ but they had a much better best win: blowing out Saint Joseph’s on the road in December.

---

That’s 12 autobids I think should remain with their rightful owners, which leaves ten I think should be reassigned.

Missed the mark

WAC: (2) Utah Valley over (5) Grand Canyon

The WAC is generally strong at the top, so any of its contenders have a nonzero chance of pulling off a March Madness upset, but it’s clear that Grand Canyon wouldn’t have had the best chance.

The debate is between (1) Sam Houston and (2) Utah Valley. Both teams had similar metrics and, honestly, either would be an excellent representative. Utah Valley actually won the conference regular season title, but they got the 2-seed in the conference tournament because the WAC uses a proprietary seeding formula that takes the non-conference slate into account.

In non-conference play, Utah Valley won at BYU and at Oregon, but they also took a baffling loss to Morgan State on a neutral court in Jamaica that hurt them in the formula. Meanwhile, Sam Houston won at Oklahoma and at Utah and avoided a bad loss. I think Utah Valley’s wins are more impressive (Oregon is a 1-seed in the NIT), and they also won the regular season title in part because they beat Sam Houston head-to-head (though it was at home), so I’m going to write the bad loss off as a fluke and give Utah Valley the advantage.

Some might disagree with this and put Sam Houston in this spot, but either way, it’s not Grand Canyon.

Ivy: (1) Yale over (2) Princeton

Yale and Princeton had nearly identical résumés but Yale was #68 in KenPom to Princeton’s #117 when the conference tournament began. Princeton probably only beat Yale in the conference tournament because it was on their home floor.

Sun Belt: (1) Southern Miss over (2) Louisiana-Lafayette

Southern Miss, Louisiana-Lafayette, (3) Marshall, (4) James Madison, and — somewhat randomly — (8) South Alabama were all on nearly equal metric footing when the conference tournament began, but Southern Miss had the conference’s two best wins (at Vanderbilt and at Liberty, both in November) and were the only team in the league to avoid a Q4 loss.

Big West: (1) UC Irvine over (2) UC Santa Barbara

These two stalwarts had nearly identical metrics at conference tournament time, but UC Irvine notched the league’s only Q1 win (at Oregon in November). UC Santa Barbara isn’t a bad representative, per se, but UC Irvine would have been at least a little scarier.

ASUN: (2) Liberty over (1) Kennesaw State

I don’t like this any more than you do. In fact, I hate it. But neither of these résumés really jump off the screen and Liberty’s metrics are so much better that it’s pretty hard to deny that they’d be a tougher matchup in the NCAA Tournament; Liberty was #42 in KenPom at conference tournament time while Kennesaw State was #129.

Suffice it to say that this time, I’m happy the better team lost.

Colonial: (1) Hofstra over (2) Charleston

I swear this isn’t bait. Really look at their bodies of work and tell me Charleston has more impressive wins. You can’t. Hofstra had more Q2 wins and, prior to conference tournament time, they had won more away from home and against significantly tougher competition than Charleston. The cherry on top: Hofstra won the head-to-head at Charleston, the only Q1 win by either team.

MEAC: (2) NC Central over (1) Howard

The three teams at the top of this league — these two and (3) Norfolk State — all had very blah résumés, so I’m just reassigning this bid to the highest team on KenPom at conference tournament time; NC Central was #195, Norfolk State was #202, and Howard was #232.⁵ This is a min-max move, and perhaps an unnecessary one, but we’re going for the best of the best, always.

OVC: (1) Morehead State over (5) Southeast Missouri

This was a weird one: a 5-seed winning a double ladder tournament and beating the 1-seed in the process.

You could actually make a compelling argument for (6) SIU Edwardsville here. They were #247 in KenPom at conference tournament time, nearly equal to Morehead State’s #242, and they also notched a Q2 win (at Saint Louis) while Morehead State didn’t. I just…hesitate to pick a team who finished sixth in a bad league and had ten Q4 losses as a worthy March Madness representative in any right.

Southland: (2) Northwestern State over (1) TAMUCC

I went into this one in depth in the intro. I won’t repeat myself.

SWAC: (2) Grambling State over (8) Texas Southern

This was the conference title game that made me the saddest. Grambling State has never made the NCAA Tournament at the Division I level and Texas Southern might as well make hotel reservations in Dayton for the third week of March every year at this point.

A lot of teams in this league earned decent-to-good wins over Pac-12 opponents this year as part of the Pac-12/SWAC Legacy Series. Somewhat tellingly of the Pac-12, none of them were Q1, but Grambling State’s (home vs. Colorado) was Q2, and they also won at Vanderbilt, making them the only team in the league with multiple Q2 wins. To boot, they had the best metrics in the league by a pretty wide margin, coming into the conference tournament at #175 in KenPom to (1) Alcorn State’s #240.

The Seed List

Now that we have our revised list of autobids, let’s place them into a seed list the way the NCAA does for bracketing purposes. Here, I just took the NCAA’s official seed list for this year’s autobids, removed the teams whose bids I reassigned, and slotted the new teams in where I thought the NCAA would. That gives us this autobid seed list:

47. Utah Valley

48. Hofstra

49. Oral Roberts

50. Drake

51. Southern Miss

52. VCU

53. Liberty

54. Kent State

55. Yale

56. Iona

57. UC Irvine

58. Furman

59. Montana State

60. Vermont

61. Colgate

62. UNC Asheville

63. Northwestern State

64. Grambling State

65. Northern Kentucky

66. NC Central

67. Morehead State

68. Fairleigh Dickinson

The Bracket

Finally, I placed all the new autobids in the bracket position that corresponded to their seed list position based on the actual 2023 NCAA Tournament bracket. That looks like this:

Teams in green are new to the bracket. Teams in blue moved down a seed line because better teams passed them up. In red, Northern Kentucky remained on the same seed line but moved from a bye to the First Four.

Your mileage may vary, but to me, this bracket looks a lot more fun than the one that we got.⁶ It looks much scarier for power conference teams, and that's what so many people advocate for year after year.

If you’re a fan of the underdog and the mid-major, and you want mediocre high major teams to have a worse time in March…as fun as it is to daydream about restricting the volume of bids each conference can get, that will never happen.

Realistically, this is how we defeat high majors. If one-bid leagues do everything in their power to send their worthiest representatives, power conference teams will spend the four days between Selection Sunday and the Round of 64 shaking in their boots.

1. You should if you haven’t! I think it’s great but I’m biased.

2. For these purposes, a one-bid league is a conference whose only representative in the NCAA Tournament is their autobid winner, who received an 11-seed or worse. This means I’m not counting Conference USA as a one-bid league despite them only getting one bid, because Florida Atlantic earned a 9-seed and thus did not need to win their conference tournament to make the field of 68.

3. They used a standard bracket in 2021 to level the playing field and better account for the swaths of games cancelled due to the pandemic.

4. Kind of. Per KenPom, Fairleigh Dickinson was 147th in offense and 359th in defense while Merrimack was 360th in offense and 101st in defense. Overall, that works out to pretty much the same efficiency.

5. This order remained the same after Howard won the conference tournament; I’m just using pre-conference-tournament ranks because I’ve done so everywhere else in the article.

6. Liberty is an obvious caveat here.