• Villanova, Kansas, and Gonzaga are solid 1 seeds according to the CTD seeding model, but after that there is a tight cluster of teams between the 4 and 9 spots on the 1-68 list. The seeding model gives each around 15 points, meaning their profile most closely matches that of a two seed based on the committee’s historical behavior. It wouldn’t surprise me to see any of those teams - particularly Duke or Arizona - take over UNC’s spot on the 1 line.
• UCLA has been getting less respect from bracketologists than from the polls, largely because of their power ratings and large number of games against teams outside the RPI top 100. 17 of their 29 wins fall into that category, and 11 of those are outside the top 200. That makes their overall record a little misleading, but they should still be a protected seed (top 4 lines).
• Wichita State is one of the most interesting seeding discussions because of the disparity between their record & power ratings and their paucity of quality wins. I think the seeding model has them a little low as an 11 seed, but I’d guess they won’t be any higher than a 7.
• The selection model is unambiguous on its feelings about Syracuse, putting them several spots outside the field. The Orange have several good wins, though they’re all at home. They also have five losses outside the RPI top 100, including two at home and one to #219 Boston College. That’s not good.
• Other than Syracuse, there seems to be consensus around the other at-large selections. Illinois State is another team that’s been debated, but neither their profile nor power ratings are strong enough to justify selection. Stranger things have happened, though.