SEC, Big 12, C-USA, Pac-12, SWAC, and Southland Conference Tournament Predictions – 2013

Click here to check out all the conference tournament predictions.

It’s a weak SEC, but they do have one Final Four contender in Florida. That combination makes the Gators overwhelming favorites. Behind them are bubble teams galore, with Kentucky as the most likely to unseat Florida, but they are without star Nerlens Noel.

SdTeam2nd RdQtrsSemisFinalsChamp
1Florida96.086.371.9
2Kentucky73.242.410.7
6Missouri86.148.625.76.3
3Mississippi48.721.94.9
5Tennessee87.554.08.23.1
7Arkansas70.922.38.81.4
4Alabama43.84.61.2
8Georgia43.92.30.80.3
11Texas A&M63.610.42.50.40.2
10Vanderbilt29.14.50.80.0
9Louisiana State56.11.70.10.0
12South Carolina64.19.91.90.00.0
13Mississippi State35.92.60.30.00.0
14Auburn36.43.50.20.00.0

As always, Kansas is the favorite, though the field is a better bet. Kansas State tied the Jayhawks for the regular season title but it’s the 3-seed Oklahoma State that has the best chance to knock off Kansas.

SdTeamQtrsSemisFinalsChamp
1Kansas89.565.444.3
3Oklahoma State59.940.819.4
2Kansas State72.931.111.2
6Baylor40.121.89.0
5Iowa State57.119.28.9
4Oklahoma42.912.25.1
7Texas85.826.16.21.4
8West Virginia79.710.03.00.7
9Texas Tech20.30.50.20.0
10Texas Christian14.21.00.10.0

In my update on potential Bid Stealers, the top two teams that could turn a 1-bid league into a 2-bid league were Middle Tennessee and Memphis. Well, Middle Tennessee already lost in the Sun Belt tournament, and while other bracketologists aren’t quite as high on their at-large chances as my system is, they do all agree that Memphis is a tournament lock regardless. The worse news for bubble teams is that the rest of the conference–led by 2-seed Southern Miss–provides enough competition to make it more likely than not that someone besides the Tigers wins the C-USA tournament.

SdTeamQtrsSemisFinalsChamp
1Memphis81.764.945.3
2Southern Mississippi77.753.126.4
3Texas-El Paso76.631.610.6
5Tulsa55.716.26.0
4East Carolina44.310.23.7
7Alabama-Birmingham64.516.98.23.5
8Tulane57.210.84.82.2
6Houston87.022.75.61.0
9Marshall42.87.53.90.8
10Southern Methodist35.55.41.50.5
11Rice13.00.70.00.0

The Pac-12 isn’t as bad as it has been, but it’s still not great. Arizona, despite their #4 seed, is the clear favorite. But the rest of top 5 plus 8-seed Stanford all have reasonable shots to take the auto bid.

SdTeamQtrsSemisFinalsChamp
4Arizona74.254.241.4
3Oregon70.944.118.8
2California70.533.611.3
1UCLA55.319.510.2
5Colorado74.021.611.26.3
8Stanford60.330.910.45.7
6Washington53.815.77.52.0
11Washington State46.213.45.81.4
7Southern California64.122.47.61.3
9Arizona State39.713.83.31.1
12Oregon State26.04.21.40.5
10Utah35.97.11.40.0

A conference has to be pretty bad for the 220th-best team to be an 80% favorite. And, well, the SWAC is that bad. The only other team that could compete with Southern is Texas Southern and they are ineligible for the conference tourney. Of note is that even in a group of terrible teams, one teams stands out from the pack. Grambling is so bad this year that they are 96% likely to lose to the 6-seed and 339th-ranked (out of 347) team in the country, Alabama A&M. That’s impressive ineptitude.

SdTeamSemisFinalsChamp
1Southern89.180.0
2Jackson State56.332.56.8
6Alabama A&M96.010.84.2
3Alcorn State50.824.83.8
5Alabama State43.723.32.8
4Prairie View49.219.42.4
7Grambling4.00.10.0

The Southland tournament features one of the best low-major teams in Stephen F. Austin. They have a 62% chance to join the big dance, but Northwestern State and Oral Roberts could both stand in the Lumberjacks way.

SdTeamQtrsSemisFinalsChamp
1Stephen F. Austin89.662.0
2Northwestern State56.921.5
3Oral Roberts81.338.513.8
5Nicholls State64.441.55.31.5
4Southeastern Louisiana43.04.01.0
6Sam Houston State66.514.84.20.2
8McNeese State35.615.51.10.0
7Central Arkansas33.53.90.40.0

Next up: the final installment including the ACC, Big Ten, Atlantic 10, Big West, Great West, and Big Sky.

Category: College Basketball, Conference Tournament predictions, predictive, simulation, team evaluation Comment »


Leave a Reply



Back to top