This sentence cannot be rewritten without any context or specific information. Please provide the original sentence or additional details.
It is highly unlikely for you to select a flawless bracket.
Accepting that it’s difficult to read will help make your March easier.
Filling out the NCAA men’s tournament bracket is not an exact science, and winning your traditional office pool often involves a significant amount of luck.
However, this doesn’t imply that you need to navigate without guidance.
To optimize your bracket accuracy, we present four bracket tips along with a few historical trends. However, keep in mind that these tips can only take you so far, until the first games conclude.
Don’t get too cute filling out your March Madness bracket
Selecting the 15-2 upset can be an enjoyable way to show off and potentially earn bragging rights. However, due to the presence of tiered point systems in the majority of bracket pools, accurately predicting the champion is essentially essential for securing victory.
Despite the tournament’s reputation for madness, it is typically one of the top teams that emerges victorious and ultimately cuts down the nets.
Since 1985, when the number of teams in the field expanded to 64, No. 1 seeds have emerged as champions 23 times, constituting 64% of all champions. This impressive statistic includes the last four consecutive champions and seven out of the last nine.
Out of the champions during that period, an additional nine teams, which accounts for 25%, held the positions of either 2 or 3 seeds.
In the Final Four, the majority of teams are top seeds, with No. 1s representing 40.9% (59 out of 144) of the teams. No. 2 seeds account for 20.8% (30) of the Final Four, while 3s (17) and 4s (13) make up an equal percentage of 20.8%.
Although five 11-seeded teams have qualified for the Final Four, no team with a higher seed has achieved this feat.
The likelihood of an individual with no knowledge about basketball winning is not due to their selection based on animal mascots or color. Rather, it is highly probable that they have chosen the team with a higher seed to win most of the games, as this tends to occur more frequently.
If you’re determined to start off with a bang, ensure that a few of the top contenders survive the chaos in your bracket.
However, it is not advisable to solely rely on favorites. It is crucial to select strategic upsets that could distinguish you from others. Throughout tournament history, only one instance occurred where all four No. 1 seeds made it to the Final Four.
Hey, I never claimed that this would be a walk in the park.
The 12 seed upset is a real thing
The consistent occurrence of a 12 seed defeating a 5 seed in every year’s tournament suggests that it is indeed a common phenomenon.
In the last 10 tournaments, there have been a total of 16 instances where a 12 seed emerged victorious in the first round. Throughout all the tournaments, this feat has been achieved 51 times. On average, we can expect one 12 seed to secure a win each year.
However, if you choose all 12 seeds to win, chances are you will end up losing. Therefore, it is crucial to select the correct one.
You can breathe easy knowing that skipping this game probably won’t ruin your bracket. Historically, it’s highly unlikely for teams seeded fifth to go very far, with only nine of them ever making it to the Elite 8. In fact, only two 12 seeds have achieved this feat.
You are welcome to take a small risk in Round 1, but please avoid trying to prolong Cinderella’s stay.
BracketResearch has provided a historical breakdown of each first-round matchup to further expand our understanding.
One versus sixteen: 143 wins to 1 loss.
The score in the match between 2 and 15 is 135-9.
3 compared to 14: 122-22
In the competition between 4 and 13, the final score was 113-31.
The score of the match between 5 and 12 was 93-51.
The score in the match between 6 and 11 was 90-54.
The score of the game between 7 and 10 is 87-57.
The score in the match between team 8 and team 9 is 70-74.
First Four teams have had success
In 2011, the NCAA Tournament expanded to include 68 teams, thereby adding four additional games prior to the conventional opening weekend.
In this exercise, let’s disregard the two games involving 16 seeds who are expected to lose against a 1 seed. It is not advisable to attempt replicating the unpredictable success of UMBC. It is not a venture worth pursuing.
However, the remaining two games consist of the four last at-large teams to secure their spot. These teams are typically ranked as 11 seeds and have historically achieved a considerable level of success upon entering the main tournament.
In all but one of the 10 tournaments since the expansion, a team from the First Four has managed to win at least one additional game. The sole exception occurred in 2019, as both Arizona St. and Belmont were eliminated in the Round of 64. Nonetheless, UCLA compensated for this in 2021 by reaching the Final Four.
In 2011, VCU became the first team from the First Four to advance to the Final Four. Following suit, the Bruins achieved the same feat, making them the second team to accomplish this.
In addition to La Salle in 2013, Tennessee in 2014, and Syracuse in 2018, three more First Four teams managed to reach the Sweet 16. Furthermore, four additional teams from the First Four won a Round of 64 game.
Teams from the First Four that qualify at-large always present an intriguing scenario. They might either be a mid-major team that performed exceptionally well throughout the season but unfortunately faltered in their conference tournament (like Wyoming), or they could be a team from a power conference that has encountered difficulties in maintaining a steady level of performance (such as Indiana, Notre Dame, and Rutgers).
Don’t overlook the fact that they are obviously dangerous. Alternatively, it would be wiser to wait until the completion of those initial games before finalizing your bracket.
However, it is important to note that throughout history, there has never been a year in which two First Four teams emerged victorious in the main draw.
Conference strength matters
A major topic of conversation stemming from the 2021 championship revolved around Gonzaga’s seemingly effortless conference schedule, raising concerns about its potential impact on the ‘Zags.
In that game, Baylor, a member of the Big 12, dominated Gonzaga, displaying their superiority. It is important to note that the Big 12 conference held the highest rank in RPI.
Does the conference have any significance?
Kinda. Yup.
Over the last two decades, the conference ranked first or second in the RPI has produced the champion on 13 occasions. In the remaining five instances, the champion hailed from a conference ranked either third or fourth.
The exceptional cases are the years 2014 and 2004, when Connecticut emerged victorious in the championship. In 2004, despite a less successful season for the traditionally dominant Big East conference, ranked sixth among all conferences, Connecticut managed to secure the title. As for the 2014 triumph, it holds little significance in this context since the Huskies competed in the American conference, which was ranked eighth. It is worth noting that UConn, a 7 seed in that tournament, had previously participated in the Big East the year before, making the situation even more peculiar.
In most cases, a team from one of the top two conferences emerges victorious. As the regular season comes to a close this year, the Big 12 is currently leading, with the SEC, Big East, and Big Ten closely trailing behind.
Gonzaga, the top-ranked team, hails from the West Coast Conference, currently positioned at eighth place, just slightly behind the ACC.
