Anything you could ever want to know about Team results at the NCAA Tournament throughout its history (2012- Present): Who played? What seed were they? Where did they finish? When did they qualify? How many times, How many Wins, How many Losses, & How many Final 4’s? How to figure it out? Why bother?
Better yet, Why Not?
The table below indicates the teams who have made the most appearances (APP) in the tournament over its 11 year history from most to least after those who have won. It breaks down how many Championship Matches played in and won (CHAMP), how many Final Fours (SEMI), how many Elite Eights (QTR), and the number of Sweet 16’s appeared in having lost the first round (SW9-16). All COLOR coded to be in-sync with the table found below it which details more specifically which years they played, their implied seed #’s, and its record, both in that year and for all-time.
As you see the total appearances (APP) just above to the right, notice there have been 130 participants over 11 years, the same reason why you may later notice 119 matches played so far. At the conclusion of the 2024 tournament those counts become 146 participants and 134 matches played. The difference always is the number of champions crowned because they are the only team never to lose a match. i.e. 130-119 = 11 champions before this year, and 146-134 = 12 champions when2024 is concluded. There were 12 teams appearing in 2018, so there had to be 11 matches played and lost, leaving the champion as the only one not to lose. This year there are 16 teams in the tournament implying 15 matches still to play, and 15 teams who will lose a single time so that one can be crowned by not having lost in 4 consecutive opportunities to play.
Some may note looking through brackets in history there aren’t seed #s associated with the lines. This doesn’t mean there aren’t implied seed #s, however. These implied seed #s are not always literally true in the sense of perceived strength of the teams. Sometimes related to other considerations such as [1] Geography, [2] Conferences associations, and what I think I learned the last two years, [3] A committee’s interest in providing intriguing 1st round matchups for any number of reasons, as long as the placement is reasonable. Let me offer examples for each:
Geography – Dominican this year is an implied 12th seed in region #4 where Loras is hosting. Loras is clearly the #4, so Cal Lu is the implied #5 (literally true as well), making it necessary for the remaining two Midwest teams in Region 4 to be seeded #12 (Dominican) & #13 (Trine). Dominican is certainly the 11th best team in this field after Nichols, but there is no good reason to fly them East to another regional to play what would be a #6 seed. So 12th it is. You could debate Trine being #13 based on your impression of Baruch (#11) or St. Joseph’s (#14). However, one thing is for sure -Trine is somewhere in the 12th to 14th spot, so 13th it is because they are the biggest dog in Region 4. There is a little more wiggle room in the other 3 regions for the committee to work its magic because the assumption is for all 9 away teams to be within driving distance to their host’s venue.
Conference Associations – When I forecasted my bracket thoughts on Sunday before the actual one was introduced a day later, I settled on Southern Virginia as the host for Region 1 and the presumed #1 seed in this tournament. It had taken the whole season for it to finally build the highest T100 value, passing Stevens by just .05, stealing just enough points defeating Juniata on Saturday the way it did. I actually felt I owed it to them – Not even joking! Once I placed Southern Virginia at #1 in my forecast, then I knew Juniata, also from the CVC, should not be the #8 or #9 seed, so I had to forecast them over in Region 2 as the #7 seed. Intentional because it is highly preferred no two teams of the same conference should be in the same region, except of course if they are from the Midwest. (Carthage & North Central the previous two years come to mind.) There we go, hand-cuffed back to geography again.*
Intriguing 1st Round Matchups– My post yesterday demonstrates how grateful I am that we get to see NYU and Baruch square off again after writing about their once in a 100 year match score earlier this season. A Southern Virginia vs. St. Joe’s matchup in the same region is also intriguing because exactly 2 years ago to yesterday’s announcement day, St. Joe’s scored one of the biggest upsets in NCAA history as a #12 defeating the #5 Knights 3-1. Check out every rating system – the KPI, T100, IH, Massey – They all agree St. Joe’s is the stronger team. Yet the committee see’s Baruch at an implied #11 and St. Joe’s at an implied #14? Not likely the case, but where is the intrigue with NYU playing St. Joe’s and Baruch having to attempt to score on that Southern Virginia D? These are just the ones that jumped out at me right away listening to the selection show. However, it hasn’t gone unnoticed that Juniata hasn’t played Springfield in 10 years, the last time being a Springfield victory for their 3rd National Championship, the exact date this year’s championship will be played, on April 27,2024 rather than April 27, 2014. There has to be a backstory to why this matchup hasn’t happened in 10 years! I guess I must wait for a little birdie to share what it may be? Wink.. Wink… (My curiosity is now getting the best of me!) Anyhow, my hunch is the #8 vs. #9 match for the right to play Stevens at home carries a smidge less competitive leverage for championship prospects than a decade ago. Speaking of a decade ago, Juniata’s coach Glenn DeHaven was in the middle of his first tenure as a head coach for the Stevens’ Women’s team the last time these men’s teams played each other – A sort of homecoming for him as he intends on first defeating Springfield, and then take on the Mighty Ducks to make it to his first F4, and the program’s first in 10 years. It isn’t out of the realm of possibility, T100 forecasting a Juniata Regional Championship coming in at 14% probability to happen. Last season, the committee set up a rematch of St. John Fisher (#7) and Wentworth (#10) in round #1 for a second consecutive year, the first one being an extremely competitive affair. Does anybody reading this think Wentworth was #10 with Laboo healthy again later in 2023 when that bracket was being made? (I know his injury influenced W’s & L’s which the committee bases decisions on, but Vassar’s loss to Lasell with an injured Jacob Kim earlier this year didn’t seem to have an adverse affect that I can tell.)
A lot of fun looking back to see most of what I missed in real-time pre-Covid. I believe there were something like 80 teams when the NCAA began supporting this Championship Tournament, and there are now roughly 124, more than 50% growth in a little over a decade. And the tide seems to be shifting some with “Who’s Who” among the D3 MVB Landscape, too. I commend the coaches of the programs on the rise challenging traditions of established elite programs who paved the way. Keep up the good work. It is no small thing to tame the Pride, douse the flame of a Firebird, rein in a Hawk, and even harder to build a culture to not only believe, but to expect great things will happen. However, everybody needs to invest in a little secondary insurance when it comes to the Ducks. Might I suggest AFLAC for that coverage. Oh wait! Maybe not!
Answers to Trivia: [A1] Nazareth has been to two F4s in 3 tournament trips [A2] Kean has 6 quarterfinalist appearances without a Final 4. The most of any team not to have won it all. Since there have been 18 F4 programs, including the 4 who have won championships, then there must have been 14 to win a quarterfinal who haven’t won a championship.
* Hey, follow the money and it will often steer your thinking properly. Travel is costly, especially this year knowing Cal-Lu is definitely needing to fly in somewhere with a price tag over $10K alone for flights. Is it really that shocking the retrospective on the first one out in the Pool B decision was a team that would need to fly in for a tournament berth, and the the first one out in the Pool C decision would force it or another team to have to fly to its destination, too? Look, these were razor thin calls in both instances, so it is plausible cost wasn’t a factor. The sportsman in me hopes it wasn’t, but the pragmatist isn’t really so sure one way or the other. Either way, another good job by the committee in 2024 given the constraints the NCAA rules shackle them with to begin. A rock and a hard place is no where to want to be in a culture interested in shooting the messenger and asking questions later, and I think the committee did a mighty fine job the last two years, all things considered. Kudos to them.
You must be logged in to post a comment.