StatLogic Sports NCAA Tournament Bracketology: The Great 68 & More for March 5

March has arrived!

And while the first of the month officially was Sunday, it didn't really feel like March until Wednesday night when three-win Gardner-Webb upset South Carolina Upstate in the Big South Tournament.

Madness at its finest.

As of Thursday night, we will be almost fully immersed in postseason college hoops, with several conference tournaments underway and bubble teams in the power conferences hoping to add another big win or two to their resumes as the regular season winds down. The teams that can't accomplish that will get at least one more shot when their conference tourneys get underway next week.

The madness really 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 while 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 trying to differentiate themselves.

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 30-0 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 bid, so the pressure continues to mount on the RedHawks as they prepare for their regular-season finale and the MAC Tournament. If Miami doesn't win the conference tournament, the final decision will be in the hands of a Selection Committee that no one fully trusts.

There will be many teams like Miami with everything to play for during the next two weeks, and as the pressure on them ramps up along with the intensity of the games, upsets surely will be abundant. 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 and conference tournaments head toward the finish line, it's time for us to unveil our second edition of StatLogic Sports Bracketology for 2026.

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. It includes

• The Great 68

• StatLogic Seeding

• Committee Consensus

The Great 68

Our second 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 that as of today 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 ratibgs for each week of the season, providing an indication of how a team has performed along every step of its journey. We also consider our most recent rating, which provides an indication of a team's current form and how it has performed over the past four weeks. 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 at the beginning of this process was that no team with a negative SLNet rating would be considered. As we worked through our process, however, we realized that by the time we got through all of the qualified teams with non-negative SLNet rankings, there still were two open spots. Based on all other metrics at that point it was clear that Auburn and Cincinnati were the most deserving of the remaining teams.

StatLogic Sports Great 68 as of 3.5.26

Team	Seed	Body of Work Rating	SLNet Rating
Michigan	1	100.647	95
Duke	2	99.559	82
Arizona	3	99.294	88
Florida	4	98.029	56
Houston	5	97.794	56
UConn	6	97.000	82
Iowa State	7	96.824	44
Illinois	8	96.500	41
Gonzaga	9	96.529	57
Michigan State	10	95.176	51
Alabama	11	94.471	53
St. John's	12	94.176	51
Purdue	13	97.029	27
Texas Tech	14	93.529	36
Nebraska	15	93.059	51
Virginia	16	92.324	56
Vanderbilt	17	94.735	38
Tennessee	18	94.206	19
Kansas	19	92.647	33
Arkansas	20	92.559	30
Louisville	21	93.971	21
North Carolina	22	91.235	51
Wisconsin	23	90.529	24
St. Mary's	24	90.441	41
BYU	25	93.824	22
Iowa	26	92.641	25
Kentucky	27	92.294	12
St. Louis	28	90.000	35
Miami	29	89.706	24
Clemson	30	89.324	29
Villanova	31	89.000	54
Utah State	32	88.412	40
Georgia	33	90.882	15
NC State	34	89.882	25
UCLA	35	88.941	27
Ohio State	36	88.706	22
Texas A&M	37	90.412	20
SMU	38	87.706	16
Santa Clara	39	86.294	55
TCU	40	86.088	9
Indiana	41	89.882	11
Texas	42	89.176	2
VCU	43	86.412	28
San Diego State	44	85.735	13
Seton Hall	45	85.706	22
New Mexico	46	85.059	14
Missouri	47	87.735	1
Baylor	48	87.676	9
Virginia Tech	49	85.000	15
UCF	50	84.882	13
Washington	51	86.235	10
Boise State	52	83.447	16
Belmont	53	82.235	19
Nevada	54	81.118	23
USC	55	84.382	14
Dayton	56	83.029	16
Colorado	57	82.824	22
Oklahoma State	58	82.765	12
Stanford	59	83.741	3
McNeese State	60	82.618	2
Cal	61	81.824	2
Miami Ohio	62	79.618	7
Auburn	63	90.441	-1
Cincinnati	64	86.853	-5
Oklahoma	65	86.559	1
USF	66	86.000	0
Arizona State	67	82.706	1
Tulsa	68	81.971	1

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 consider. We factor in the auto-bids, the First Four and everything else that the Selection Committee hast to weigh and use our metrics to fill the bracket the way we think it SHOULD be filled.

StatLogic Seedings as of March 5:

1. Michigan, Duke, Arizona, Florida

2. UConn, Houston, Illinois, Iowa State

3. Gonzaga, Michigan State, Alabama St. John's

4. Purdue, Virginia, Nebraska, Texas Tech

5. Tennessee, Arkansas, Kansas, Vanderbilt

6. Wisconsin, North Carolina, St. Mary's, Louisville

7. Kentucky, BYU, Iowa, St. Louis

8. Clemson, Villanova, Miami, Utah State

9. UCLA, Ohio State, Georgia, NC State

10. Texas A&M, Santa Clara, SMU, TCU

11. Indiana, Texas, VCU, Seton Hall, New Mexico, San Diego State

Last Four in:

VCU, Seton Hall, New Mexico, San Diego State

First Four Out:

Missouri, Baylor, Virginia Tech, Central Florida

Committee Consensus

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