StatLogic Sports NCAA Tournament Bracketology: The Great 68 & More for 2.26.26

It's that time of year already.

March is just a few days away, which can mean only one thing: The college basketball regular season is winding down and March Madness is just about here.

The madness really already has started as the dog days of February arrived several weeks ago. The onset of February brought the usual array of upsets as the very best teams began to ease into their conference tournaments with the goal of remaining as healthy as possible and saving energy for what they hope will be a deep NCAA Tournament run.

The teams that really have nothing to play for this time of year often even keep it on cruise control heading into their conference tournaments. Their body of work already speaks for itself, and over the years we've learned that the NCAA Tournament Selection Committee doesn't put much stock in those league playoff games except when considering teams that are clearly on the bubble and fighting to add one or two more intriguing pieces to the puzzle that is their resume.

We've seen many of this year's Goliaths go down in recent weeks, including Michigan, Duke, Houston, Arizona and Iowa State. Believe it or not, the only undefeated team remaining is 28-0 Miami University (Ohio). St. Louis also has emerged from mid-major obscurity to become an Atlantic 10 powerhouse and legitimate top 25 team this season, but even the Billikens succumbed to the dog-day doldrums in a recent lackluster loss to Dayton.

Of those teams, Miami is the only one not assured of an NCAA Tournament spot, so the pressure will start to mount on the RedHawks once the MAC Tournament begins and they have to win or leave the decision in the hands of a Selection Committee that doesn't seem likely to give them an at-large berth.

There will be many teams like Miami with everything to play for during the next few weeks, and as the pressure on them ramps up, upsets without a doubt will occur. It's amazing how much easier it can be for the weaker teams with nothing to lose to put the basketball through the hoop than it is for the ones with high expectations that can't afford a loss.

That drama and uncertainty is what makes these next six-plus weeks one of the most exciting times of the year for sports fans. And now, as regular-season play heads toward the finish line, it's time for us to unveil our first edition of StatLogic Sports Bracketology for the 2025-26 season.

As part of our process this year we have taken a new and unique approach, creating our own StatLogic Net Ratings (SLNet) that we can use in combination with our season-long power ratings and various other available metrics to paint a complete postseason portrait.

With so much data available at our fingertips, we thought it would be fun to take a three-pronged approach to our StatLogic Sports Bracketology this year. It will include:

• The Great 68

• StatLogic Seeding

• Committee Consensus

The Great 68

Our first edition of the StatLogic Sports Great 68 can be found below. While this may not be the 68 "best" teams in America, we believe these are the 68 teams as of today that would provide us with the most competitive tournament. We throw automatic bids out the window for this ranking and simply list the overall seeds from Nos. 1 through 68.

For this ranking, we consider a team's overall body of work first. To determine our "Body of Work" rating, we include our weekly power rankings for each week of the season, providing an indication of how a team has performed along every step of its journey to date, along with our most recent rating, which provides an indication of a team's current form.. Additional metrics such as the NCAA Net ratings, KenPom Haslametrics, etc. are considered in rating a team's overall body of work.

The "Body of Work" metric then is used in conjunction with our own SLNet rating to determine the 68 teams that would provide us with the best possible NCAA Tournament field. The SLNet rating simply is a way to quantify the quality of a team's wins and losses, which by default rewards teams that play well against more challenging schedules.

Our one hard-and-fast rule is that no team with a negative SLNet rating can be in the Great 68. As we worked through our process, the only team left out that we feel could enhance the field was Cincinnati. But the Bearcats made their own bed by posting a SLNet rating of minus-7 thanks to negative performances against top 100 opponents and a horrific loss to a team ranked among the nation's bottom 100.

Team Nos. 69 and 70 are listed in red at the bottom as the "first two out." This does not include games of Feb. 25, so George Mason's loss to St. Joseph's should knock them out of our next iteration of the Great 68.

StatLogic Sports Great 68 as of 2.26.26

Team	Seed	Body of Work	SLNet
Michigan	1	100.688	100
Duke	2	99.450	71
Arizona	3	99.200	76
Iowa State	4	97.038	55
Houston	5	97.650	45
Purdue	6	97.475	52
Florida	7	97.431	43
UConn	8	96.525	73
Gonzaga	9	96.688	69
Illinois	10	96.438	43
Vanderbilt	11	95.213	37
Michigan State	12	95.094	42
Alabama	13	94.394	39
Nebraska	14	93.331	52
Kansas	15	92.994	42
Virginia	16	92.519	56
Texas Tech	17	93.694	40
St. John's	18	94.425	51
Tennessee	19	94.363	24
Arkansas	20	92.669	29
BYU	21	94.613	30
Iowa	22	92.525	24
North Carolina	23	91.313	32
St. Louis	24	90.131	39
Kentucky	25	92.400	16
Wisconsin	26	90.513	18
St. Mary's	27	90.006	44
Villanova	28	89.131	46
Utah State	29	88.975	45
Texas A&M	30	90.588	20
NC State	31	90.350	28
Miami	32	89.513	25
Santa Clara	33	86.519	51
Louisville	34	94.244	4
Auburn	35	91.088	1
Clemson	36	89.000	14
UCLA	37	88.694	21
SMU	38	88.481	22
Ohio State	39	88.438	23
San Diego State	40	85.981	19
Seton Hall	41	85.550	23
New Mexico	42	85.313	19
Indiana	43	90.013	4
Texas	44	89.131	5
UCF	45	85.194	8
Georgia	46	90.519	8
Baylor	47	87.844	0
VCU	48	86.725	28
Virginia Tech	49	85.281	17
TCU	50	85.681	6
Missouri	51	87.713	8
Washington	52	86.713	7
Boise State	53	83.288	12
Belmont	54	82.206	23
USC	55	84.825	22
USF	56	85.775	4
Cal	57	82.175	3
Nevada	58	81.694	41
McNeese State	59	83.088	8
Dayton	60	83.063	18
Oklahoma State	61	82.900	6
Colorado	62	82.744	16
Oklahoma	63	86.175	0
Tulsa	64	81.781	0
Colorado State	65	80.625	4
Miami Ohio	66	79.906	4
Syracuse	67	83.031	1
George Mason	68	76.600	10
Liberty	69	80.188	1
Cincinnati	70	86.531	-7

StatLogic Seeding

For our version of Bracketology, StatLogic Seeding simply shows how we would seed the tournament given the 68-team format and all the parameters the Selection Committee has to deal with. We will factor in the auto-bids, the First Four and everything else that the Selection Committe considers and use our metrics to fill the bracket the way we think it SHOULD be filled.

Unlike out Great 68, for StatLogic Seeding we have considered game results from Feb. 25.

Here is our StatLogic Seeding as of Feb. 25:

1. Michigan, Duke, Arizona, Iowa State

2. Florida, Houston, Purdue, UConn

3. Illinois, Gonzaga, Michigan State, Vanderbilt

4. Kansas, Alabama, Nebraska, Virginia

5. Tennessee, Texas Tech, Arkansas, St. John's

6. BYU, North Carolina, Iowa, Wisconsin

7. Utah State, Villanova, St. Mary's, St. Louis,

8. Kentucky, Miami, Texas A&M, NC State

9. Louisville, Clemson, SMU, UCLA

10. Auburn, Ohio State, San Diego State, UCF

11. New Mexico, Seton Hall, Nevada, Texas, Indiana, Georgia,

First Four Out:

VCU, Virginia Tech, TCU, Baylor

Next Four Out:

Missouri, Washington, Boise State Belmont (possible conference champ)

Committee Consensus

This will be the final component of our StatLogic Sports Bracketology. We will begin posting it once the conference tournaments get underway, and this will be what we believe the Selection Committee will do. This will. be our best guess at what the actual tournament will look like, not what we think it should be.