If you've been following my NCAA Tournament Picks for a while, you know that I like to eliminate teams that can't win on the road, have freshman point guards, etc. You also may have noticed that I haven't updated my info pages this year.
The reason for this? I asked a math whiz friend of mine to construct a formula that incorporated everything I looked for in the NCAA Tournament. I just had to plug all of the numbers in, and Excel spit out the results.
Below are the computer rankings that I used for my NCAA Tournament picks. The fields I looked at were: offensive efficiency, defensive efficiency, coaching history in the tournament, number of conference blowout victories, point differential, freshmen point guards, road victories, success in the final 10 games, strength of schedule, and other miscellaneous things like whether a team has only one scorer or a major injury. These attributes are all weighted based on importance.
Obviously, the closer the number is to zero, the better the team is:
Kentucky - 39.67
Michigan State - 40.56
North Carolina - 46.50
Wichita State - 47.66 (shocked by this)
Memphis - 53.92 (should be much higher than No. 8 seed!)
Ohio State - 57.55
Vanderbilt - 59.03
Kansas - 62.94
Syracuse - 65.37 (with penalty for Fab Melo)
Indiana - 68.08
Saint Louis - 69.81 (should be much higher than No. 9 seed!)
Baylor - 71.25
Wisconsin - 72.09
Marquette - 73.67
Duke - 73.72 (very overrated)
New Mexico - 74.63
VCU - 74.75 (should be much higher than No. 12 seed!)
Missouri - 75.48
Florida State - 79.28
Belmont - 80.15
Georgetown - 80.28 (poor coaching drags them down)
Purdue - 81.16
Michigan - 83.93
California - 86.35
Cincinnati - 87.77
Louisville - 89.04 (122th in offensive efficiency)
@nflpicksbyme.com @#$@ YOU BOL SON YOU BE DRINKIN THAT WALTER KOOL-AID, HE AINT @#$@ I BE BETTER THAN HIM @#$@. WHY YALL BE RIDING HIS DICK SO MUCH BOL SON? YALL A BUNCH OF EAST SIDE BETA @[email protected]!!!!!! GET TO MY LEVEL SON!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!