Per GopherHole Request, Projecting the At-Larges Numbers

GopherHole asked me to post my at-large selection numbers vs. Joe Lunardi (ESPN) and Jerry Palm (CBS), so here they are. I've also posted my at-large selection numbers since I started doing this way back to the 1991-92 season.

Palm leads Lunardi and I by 2 since the field expanded to 68 teams in the 2010-11 season. Palm and I were perfect this year, Lunardi missed 1 (took Syracuse over USC). I guess my main calling card right now would be I've been perfect twice since the field expansion to 68, Palm and Lunardi once each. Most importantly, I rebounded from a tough year (missed 4 last season).

Jerry Palm (CBS) At-Large Projections
2010-11: 35/37 (St. Mary’s/Virginia Tech; UAB/USC in instead)
2011-12: 35/37 (Northwestern/Seton Hall; Iona/NC State in instead)
2012-13: 36/37 (Tennessee; Middle Tennessee in instead)
2013-14: 35/36 (SMU; NC State in instead)
2014-15: 35/36 (Colorado State/UCLA in instead)
2015-16: 34/36 (Monmouth/Saint Bonaventure; Tulsa/Vanderbilt in instead)
2016-17: 36/36 – perfect --
Since Field of 68: 246/255 (96.5%)

SelectionSunday/@Fieldof68Freak At-Large Projections
2010-11: 35/37 (Colorado/Virginia Tech; Georgia/UAB in instead)
2011-12: 36/37 (Seton Hall; Iona in instead)
2012-13: 36/37 (Kentucky; La Salle in instead)
2013-14: 36/36 – perfect --
2014-15: 33/36 (Colorado State/Old Dominion/Temple; BYU/Indiana/UCLA in instead)
2015-16: 32/36: (Monmouth/Saint Bonaventure/Saint Mary’s/San Diego State; Syracuse/Tulsa/Vanderbilt/Wichita State in instead)
2016-17: 36/36 – perfect --
Since Field of 68: 244/255 (95.7%)

Joe Lunardi (ESPN) At-Large Projections
2010-11: 34/37 (Colorado/St. Mary’s/Virginia Tech; Georgia/UAB/VCU in instead)
2011-12: 36/37 (Seton Hall; Iona in instead)
2012-13: 37/37 – perfect --
2013-14: 35/36 (SMU; NC State in instead)
2014-15: 34/36 (Colorado State/Temple; Indiana/UCLA in instead)
2015-16: 33/36 (Saint Bonaventure/Saint Mary’s/San Diego State Syracuse/Tulsa/Vanderbilt in instead)
2016-17: 35/36 (Syracuse/USC in instead)
Since Field of 68: 244/255 (95.7%)

In the 26 years I've done this, have been perfect on only 4 occasions:

Projecting At-Larges (1991-92 through 2016-17)
1991-92: 33/34
1992-93: 31/34
1993-94: 30/34
1994-95: 30/34
1995-96: 33/34
1996-97: 31/34
1997-98: 30/34
1998-99: 31/34
1999-00: 32/34
2000-01: 34/34 -- perfect --
2001-02: 33/34
2002-03: 33/34
2003-04: 31/34
2004-05: 32/34
2005-06: 31/34
2006-07: 32/34
2007-08: 33/34
2008-09: 34/34 -- perfect --
2009-10: 33/34
2010-11: 35/37
2011-12: 36/37
2012-13: 36/37
2013-14: 36/36 – perfect --
2014-15: 33/36
2015-16: 32/36
2016-17: 36/36 -- perfect --
Totals: 851/901 (94.5%)

Miscellaneous Historical RPI Info As It Pertains To First Four.. ...

Five Worst RPI At-Larges Since Expansion to 68 (Worst to Best)
72. Syracuse – 2015-16
67. USC – 2010-11
64. Marquette -- 2010-11
63. Vanderbilt – 2015-16
61. Indiana – 2014-15

First Four RPI At-Larges (Best to Worst)
28. Middle Tennessee (2012-13)
29. Saint Mary’s (2012-13)
31. UAB (2010-11)
32. Dayton (2014-15) – 2nd round
36. BYU (2014-15)
37. Cal (2011-12)
39. Wake Forest (2016-17)
40. Boise State (2014-15)
40. Iona (2011-12)
41. Boise State (2012-13)
41. USC (2016-17)
42. Tennessee (2013-14) – Sweet 16
45. BYU (2011-12)
46. La Salle (2012-13) – Sweet 16
47. Wichita State (2015-16) – 2nd round
47. Xavier (2013-14)
49. VCU (2010-11) – Final 4
52. USF (2011-12) – 2nd round
55. NC State (2013-14) – 2nd round
56. Iowa (2013-14)
56. Providence (2016-17)
57. Clemson (2010-11)
57. Michigan (2015-16)
57. Kansas State (2016-17)
58. Tulsa (2015-16)
60. Ole Miss (2014-15)
63. Vanderbilt (2015-16)
67. USC (2010-11)

Literally, our resident expert (with no quotes around expert).

SS, do you ever enter the bracket matrix contest?
How do you compare on their scoring system?

It appears about 100 out of 150 brackets on their matrix nailed 68 for 68.

How much information you do glean from the others predictions? Or do you ignore theirs until you make yours? Just curious as to how you come up with such similar teams (aside from just being correct) to them.

Face The Facts said:

SS, do you ever enter the bracket matrix contest?
How do you compare on their scoring system?

It appears about 100 out of 150 brackets on their matrix nailed 68 for 68.

Click to expand...

I don't. I don't do the seeding stuff, so not eligible.

And yes, this wasn't a difficult year to pick the at-larges. Weren't may mysteries at the bottom of the bracket.

UpAndUnder43 said:

How much information you do glean from the others predictions? Or do you ignore theirs until you make yours? Just curious as to how you come up with such similar teams (aside from just being correct) to them.

Click to expand...

I've been doing this for a long time -- perhaps even longer than Lunardi & Palm -- so don't feel like I need to copy their work! I try to avoid/ignore projections as much as possible once we're a week or so away from the bracket, but that's hard to do when watching games all the time. Have my own system that I use as a guide for picking the teams. I always get my projections "out there" before Lunardi and Palm do their final projections, so that's why I always post late Saturday night/early Sunday morning. Sometimes I'll have to list contingencies if there are Sunday games with potential bid-stealers, but that wasn't the case this year.

One thing I DO NOT do is pay attention to the historical aspect of at-large selections. Treat every year as a new slate. I don't care if the committee has never snubbed a power conference team with such & such RPI, or if they've never selected an at-large team with 15 losses. Each year is different, each committee is different.

I would be the first to admit a monkey could select the first 30 at-larges. It's usually the last 5-7 bids that require a lot more time, but this year it was much easier. It really only came down to 4 or 5 teams for maybe 1 or 2 bids. ... USC, Syracuse, Kansas State, Wake Forest, and Xavier (I didn't like X's resume). Providence is a First 4 team, and Vanderbilt received a lot of attention because of the 15 loses, but in the last day or so I thought the Friars and Commodores became fairly obvious choices. And once we got to within a couple days of Selection Sunday it became apparent Illinois State had no shot. By Friday I had pretty much ruled out ISU.

For what it's worth, I absolutely would have had Middle Tennessee in the field as an at-large had they not won the Conference USA Tournament.

Thanks for the info. I didn't mean to imply you stole from them, was just curious.

As always, I appreciate your work. It is fun to watch.

UpAndUnder43 said:

Thanks for the info. I didn't mean to imply you stole from them, was just curious.

As always, I appreciate your work. It is fun to watch.

Click to expand...

No worries.