The bracket below is our best current prediction of the final NIT bracket. It is predictive of where things will end up. It is not a reflection of where things currently stand.
We aren’t currently running our full model. That will come soon, but in the meantime, here’s how this works.
If you notice any irregularities or have questions of any sort, please say something in the comments or on twitter: @joestunardi.
- If you want NCAA Tournament Bracketology, we have that too.
- Regions are ordered as follows: first overall seed; fourth overall seed; second overall seed; third overall seed.
- A single asterisk designates an exempt bid, awarded to the best available teams from certain conferences. A double asterisk designates an automatic bid, awarded to certain conference champions who lose in their conference tournament. We currently estimate five to be the likeliest number of automatic bids, and we’ve given these five to the conference favorites we estimate to be likeliest to receive them.
Last Updated: Preseason
Mississippi Region
| 1. Mississippi* |
| Virginia |
| 4. Northern Iowa* |
| Nebraska |
| 3. Louisville* |
| Ohio** |
| 2. Missouri* |
| New Mexico |
LSU Region
| 1. LSU* |
| College of Charleston** |
| 4. Louisiana Tech* |
| SMU |
| 3. UAB* |
| Georgia |
| 2. Northwestern* |
| Notre Dame |
Miami (FL) Region
| 1. Miami (FL)* |
| Wofford** |
| 4. San Francisco* |
| Nevada |
| 3. Seton Hall* |
| Syracuse |
| 2. Boise State* |
| Penn State |
VCU Region
| 1. VCU* |
| Appalachian State** |
| 4. Seattle* |
| Minnesota |
| 3. Arizona State* |
| South Carolina |
| 2. NC State* |
| High Point** |
Note: With the College Basketball Crown expected to take two teams each from the Big 12, Big East, and Big Ten, we have removed TCU, USC, Rutgers, Providence, UCF, and Butler from our projected field. In our projection, they would each be higher in line for an exempt bid than the recipient from their respective league.
GO COUGS! I don’t really know how you explain away your off-ness with WSU (4 seed to not being in at all is an utterly way off projection)…..and I don’t know if I buy the….oh they changed it….seeding! argument, that’s lol. How would the net 61 team not make it in when around 20 teams are being chosen after 68 have already been swiped? As far as my opinion, I think it’s an eastern bias seeping into the niche that is NIT bracketology….appreciate what you do but you had me on pins and needles all week, and I feel drained for following your lead……lol. Also probably because my cat made me sleep in the guest bed last night.You had me so shocked when I saw the 4. But really, what are you saying changed this year to put a not-in-it team to a 4? Could you be specific? I mean you talk like the NIT didn’t use the NET before, but I would like proof of that.
You’re right! Our model was three seed lines off on Washington State, and off by the same amount on Vanderbilt and South Carolina. Off even more on Utah State. Those were big misses, and while we expect a few big misses, those were more than we expected. We’ll be digging in to what the model’s missing so we can make it more accurate next year, and we’ll try to be clearer on how accurate we expect it to be.
Sorry if I’ve given the impression the NIT selection committee doesn’t use NET—our model’s formula this year did rely on NET pretty heavily, just not nearly as heavily as the NIT committee seems to (or KenPom—it’ll be interesting to run the numbers and see if KenPom or NET tracks more closely with the committee’s decisions). This year, NET made up about 31% of our “raw score,” which is where the seeding formula starts. Next year, it might make up more, especially with NIT teams. We’ll see what the numbers show when we dig in late this summer.
Hope you can get better sleep knowing the Cougs are in! Good luck to your guys. Should be a fun tournament this year.
Noticed you have Iona all the way at a 3 seed despite a NET ranking in the 80s. How realistic is this?
They have a great KPI and SOR, which are slightly more predictive than NET in our model’s formula. We’ve seen teams with strong overall W-L records get a boost in the past, too, and they meet our threshold for that. I understand the skepticism, and share some of it, but don’t think a 3-seed would be all that wild for them. We’ll see.
No Penn State?
Not this year.
I would like to see Seattle U (Co WAC champs) get a look.
I like the rankings numerically; however, it’s important to note that the NIT committee can (and has/will) moved teams up and down to facilitate regional play. That is actually in the NIT by-laws. Under this bracket projection, LBSU and Alcorn State would probably be swapped to allow LBSU to travel to Provo and Alcorn to travel to Norman, as opposed to the cost prohibition of vice-versa.
Yes! We don’t do that in our projections because we’d rather mislead on potential matchups than mislead on expected seedings. But that’s definitely a possible swap.
You completely left out the CUSA champs N. Texas which will be a 1 or 2 seed at the lowest lol Good Job!
Thanks, Nathan! Our model is actually very high on North Texas. Good chance it’s wrong on them, but not an oversight: It has them as the last team in the NCAA Tournament.
How did St. John’s find there way in?
An extra bubble spot opened up with bid thief/auto bid movement! They’d been first in line for a couple days, I believe.
St John’s over Vandy?
Vanderbilt moves in today. Needs Princeton to lose today to stay in our final projection. St. John’s is still ahead of them on our seed list, but both are in the mix for the final at-large spots, followed by Louisiana Tech and Washington State and Florida State and a few others.
You mean Vandy needs Princeton to win, right?
Yes. So sorry. Typo.
Yale just beat Princeton 66-64, so Vandy probably out unfortunately.
It’s tight in our model between them and St. John’s, but our model does have Vanderbilt out. Could be other surprises from the selection committee—not necessarily an SJU vs. Vandy decision for them—but that’s how our model sees it.
St John’s highly underperformed this year but still has a higher KenPom then 70 pct of this field . If you haven’t seen them play their Defense is overwhelming . Jay Wright the other night said they were the most swarming team in the country . If champagne stay next year top 25 for sure .
What is the best/worst case seed range for Iona in your mind?
That’s a good question. It’s a little tricky because the committee can move teams one seed line to ease travel, so to be safe, I’d say anywhere from a 2-seed to a 7-seed, but realistically, they’re probably between a 3 and a 6. 2 or 7 would be pretty surprising.
What are your thoughts on the A10 now? Particularly VCU seed? Lastly, will the top seed host this year after last year’s covid situation? If so, would VCU host? Thx! Patrick
The higher seed will host in each of the first three rounds if their court’s available (this is relevant for Dayton, who can’t host in the first round). If Dayton does beat Richmond, Richmond could still find its way in but it’d be tough (would need teams like Alcorn State and Long Beach State to win so they wouldn’t use their respective automatic bids). SLU and St. Bonaventure both appear safe. Davidson is probably an NCAAT lock. Our model’s higher on VCU than most bracketologies—it thinks they still have an NCAAT chance, but our model is very capable of being wrong (we’re expecting it to miss one or two teams on each bubble). Overall, looking like somewhere between two and five A-10 bids, most likely four (VCU, Dayton, SLU, SBU).
Iona vs. St. John’s
Hey, you’re missing North Texas….auto bid.
Our model still has them in the NCAA Tournament. There’s a good chance the model’s wrong on that, or that it changes with today and tomorrow’s results, but their résumé’s more competitive than it’s being made out to be. Top 50 in NET/KPI/KenPom, 55th in SOR, 6-4 against Q1/Q2, 55th-ranked NCSOS, 16 games above .500…basically, there’s a chance, and I’d guess that the market’s right and our model’s wrong, but we don’t want to change the model just to follow the herd. That kind of defeats the purpose of doing this purely objectively.
Colorado still as a 6 below Oregon doesn’t make a lot of sense.
Yeah, that’s a weird one. Right now, Oregon’s Q1 results are pulling them up, but if Colorado loses to Arizona there’s about a 75% chance Oregon and Colorado end up on the same seed line, making it something of a moot point. At least in our model. Possible the model’s low on the Buffs.
COLORADO BUFFS beat Oregon Massive game tonite against Arizona in Pac 12 semi At worst you gotta have them now into a 4 seed. One home game, And over Oregon too Beat them 2x this year now GO BUFFS shock the world tonite Lemme know joe
Big opportunity! It’s possible our model’s low on the Buffs, but their Q1 results are holding them back right now. We’ll see if they can change that tonight, or at least pull their NET up enough to get closer to home game territory.
you really are tanking my Colorado Buffs in your model Not sure how they dont make it to a 4 seed at worst tonite. They truly deserve one home game cant believe Wyoming got in That screws up your “regional model” somewhat ANY shot for Buffs to end up a 4 or higher? to the Nit bracket show we gooooo
I’d say there’s a good chance the Buffs get a home game! Almost 50%. Our model’s often off by a seed line or so, and it’s off by two seed lines on roughly one in every fifteen teams, so that should happen a few times in here.
lets hope you’re right The Buffs play with a lot of heart and spirit i can see a deep for my squad #LFG! Thx Joe
How is Arkansas State not in this field. With one of the top 10 big men in the country, their continued post season fan presence, and 18 wins? What am I missing here?
The Sun Belt is far superior to a lot of the conferences being selected, and I would expect at a min they would get two teams into the NIT.
NIT automatic bids are awarded to regular season champions who lose in their conference tournament, like Texas State did. Beyond that, the committee takes the teams it views to be the best and have the best résumés that weren’t selected for the NCAA Tournament. This means that generally, at-large bids in the NIT are viewed by the committees to be between roughly the 46th and 70th-best teams/résumés in the country.
I’m sure today’s update presumed an Oklahoma loss to Baylor. Does this move the needle up to a 1 seed?
no less than a 2?
It’s definitely going to move the needle. We’ll run the model again in the morning and see what it says, but wow. What a win. Gamechanger.
A lot of other fields have the WVU Mountaineers in and Bob Huggins said today they’re gonna play more basketball is Coach Huggins pulling strings behind the scenes?
The NIT committee hasn’t extended an at-large invitation to a sub-.500 team in a long time. Possibly ever. If ever a sub-.500 team were to be invited, I’d think it’d be one with a résumé like West Virginia’s, but we’ve gotten burned before including sub-.500 teams in our projection, and after last year, we decided to make that pretty much a no-go for our model, since the data suggests it’s virtually impossible for a sub-.500 team to make the cut. It’s possible Huggins was talking about the CBI or The Basketball Classic. I know they’ve played in the CBI before.
Sadly y’all are the only bracket I see without WVU as they have a good resume for the NIT and have won it before as well. Gotta remember as the committee will I’m sure that a 16 and 17 big 12 team is better than most .500 teams out of other conferences. Not to mention WVU has a great out of conference record this season with only 2 non conference losses.
Now that Syracuse has concluded its ACC tournament with a loss to Duke while playing without Buddy Boeheim, their best player, and leaving them with a 15-16 record, what’s the chance that the NIT will offer Syracuse a bid just to allow Jim Boeheim to keep alive his Syracuse streak of playing in a post-season tournament.
Although I’d thought that a record of no worse than .500 was required to play in the NIT, I’ve learned that the .500 record is no longer a requirement. While there probably are 32 other teams that would be more deserving of a bid to the NIT, would you consider that Syracuse now could be on the NIT bubble if only to give the NIT an opening-round venue that would draw more than 20,000 fans and also get a decent number of people watching on TV?
It would be stunning if Syracuse received an NIT bid. ESPN’s no longer part of the selection process, and whether it’s a rule or not, the NIT hasn’t taken a sub-.500 team in a long time (maybe ever). It’s hard to imagine the committee—largely made up of former coaches, I believe—ending Santa Clara’s season or Drake’s season or St. John’s season to put in a team as bad as Syracuse.
As bad as Syracuse? You must not watch the games.
You’re right, that was unfair—I’m sorry. I should’ve said a team with a resume as bad as that of Syracuse.
You’re probably right. Maybe the people who run the College Basketball Invitational Tournament in Daytona Beach might decide to make a splash by inviting some .500 and sub-.500 teams from some of the major conferences like Syracuse, West Virginia, Stanford and Maryland?
As rough as this season was for Syracuse, we all know that they are capable of beating every team projected to be in the NIT. In the ACC tournament this week they blew out FSU by 40+ points and controlled a majority of the Duke game without their leader and leading scorer Buddy Boeheim. They easily have the largest attendance record/viewership of anyone in the NIT projections and would be a huge draw at MSG.. if the NIT committee is smart they include Syracuse in the field.
Not likely that Syracuse would get a NIT invite, and less likely it would get a home game.
True unlike WVU who has managed to sell out games even with a poor conference showing this season. WVU fans historically travel well and of the sub 500 teams I’d likely see them add WVU with their great out of conference record over a 500 team from a weaker conference as the big 12 is pretty much the yearly powerhouse conference.
Lol, Syracuse has literally been 1st or 2nd in the country in average attendance every year since the 80’s.
I don’t understand why Southern Conference only gets one NCAA bid evey year.This year Chattanooga and Furman are so close, why wouldnt they both get in…Furman played a difficult schedule beating Louisville and almost beating Mississippi State and Belmont..They only lose on a 40 foot heave at the buzzer..otherwise would have gotten automatic bid…
Dude. I was thinking the EXACT same thing. Agree COMPLETELY
I think Furman will ultimately be included in this field for a couple of reasons…I don’t think there’s a way to keep out the No. 12 conference in the nation to a combined one bid between two tournaments after losing on a buzzer-beater. I go back to last year…Furman was one of the first four out of last year’s condensed field at 16 teams, with a 16-9 record. I think you will see the Paladins in the field. Last season, the Paladins were kept out due to ESPN TV and bowl contracts with CUSA teams …That’s the reality of the world we live…If Furman isn’t included, college basketball is an absolute farce.
The committee can always change how it makes its decisions year to year, but based on what it’s done in the past, it would be pretty surprising for Furman to make the cut. There’s no indication the committee considers how many teams each conference puts in the field, and Furman’s poor SOR and lack of Q1 wins are historically bad indicators for their chances. For whatever it’s worth, ESPN was removed from the formal NIT selection process a while back, and last year’s NIT is hard to use as an indicator because so many teams opted out.
Furman’s a solid team. But it would be surprising, based on what past committees have done, if this year’s committee put them in the field.
Thanks…Just a frustrating process for one-bid leagues that rank in the top third of basketball for the past three or four seasons to have a problem getting another bid somewhere without having to buy your way into some tourney these days.
It is really, really hard to climb the hierarchy as a mid-major. And it’s especially hard to do that without jumping conferences. Definitely sympathize with that sentiment.
Bellarmine beats Jacksonville (JU) in the ASUN final. Bellarmine is ineligible for NCAA as they are still in transition probation from D2. So this moves Jacksonville State University out of the NIT AQ for being the regular season champion and into the NCAA as the AQ.
So does the ASUN have anyone that can replace JSU in the 8th seed. Liberty perhaps?
I don’t think it works like that—I think the automatic bid just vanishes. This is a unique situation, so it’s possible there’s a protocol I’m missing (or that one will be created), but our impression at this time is that nobody from the ASUN will get an automatic NIT bid.
How does it work with Bellarmine and Jacksonville? Does Bellarmine get an auto-bid to NIT by winning their conference? I heard that although not eligible for the NCAA they are eligible for NIT? Although they did not win their regular season conference. I assume Jacksonville is looking at CBI?
Our impression is that Bellarmine is ineligible for the NIT, as it’s run by the NCAA. We could be wrong on that, and we’re trying to confirm it, but that’s our impression right now. Automatic bids go to regular season champions who don’t win their conference tournaments, so Bellarmine’s situation doesn’t apply under that definition, but it’s a unique situation and there’s some opacity with NIT eligibility rules, so I won’t personally rule it out, not knowing with any certainty myself. If Jacksonville wants to keep playing, it’ll have to be in the CBI or The Basketball Classic.
Don’t waste your time inviting Florida. They don’t look like a Team that wants to play anymore, let alone play for Mike White.
Don’t waste your time inviting Florida. They don’t look like a Team that wants to play anymore, let alone play for Mike White.
How close is Clemson to making the NIT? 1 ACC tournament win? 2? 3?
If the bubble softens, two could possibly do it, but realistically they probably need three, or maybe even four (since beating ND would probably knock that down to a Q2 win). Their SOR and KPI are pretty rough entering today. Need those closer to 80 or 70.
You don’t have Washington State in this field at all. Seems like a major oversight
Listed as a 4 seed at other NIT bracketology sites
Washington State has the 115th-ranked SOR in the country and hasn’t won a Q1 game. Our model has them close to the field—it listed them as the fourth team out yesterday, off a projection where their median result was to beat Cal but lose to UCLA—so it’s certainly possible they’ll make it without beating UCLA, but our model suggests they need to either beat UCLA or get a lot of help. Our model can be wrong, but of the two other NIT Bracketology sites I know of, only one has them in the projected field when automatic bids are accounted for.
Washington State has a “58” Net ranking and 102 SOS. Fun how we can pick and choose what stats we use and which ones we don’t. Your model is horribly wrong.
Look, man, I like Washington State. Big Kyle Smith fan, fan of land grants in general since I come from an Iowa State family. I wish Washington State the best. We’re not just picking and choosing stats arbitrarily here, though. We built a model based on what numbers, in the recent past, have been indicative of who will and won’t be invited to play in the NCAA Tournament and the NIT. That model indicates Washington State has some work to do. There’s a lot of basketball left to be played before Sunday, and based on our backtesting, we expect our model to miss a team or two on the lower bubble. We aren’t saying Washington State won’t make it, or that Washington State’s bad or anything. They just have some work to do.
Someone remains bitter about the Alamo Bowl from a few years back, it’s quite clear to me now. Come on, you use subjection and your own bias is a factor.
Oh man, that’s good. That would explain why the model’s low on Notre Dame and Clemson, too, and high on Oregon.
The details of our bracketology formula are available at the “here you go” link up top, if you’re curious. No mention of bowl game results, but if you take the first letter of each paragraph, they do spell out “Gardner Minshew stinks.”
Okay okay point taken. You cite two other NIT sites…..one is the dratings one, what is the other one?
John Templon’s been doing this the longest. He’s at nitbracketology.blogspot.com this year.
Okay dude, so actually two of the three have Wazzu in, only yours doesn’t
Not seeing them on John’s latest:
https://nitbracketology.blogspot.com/p/current-nit-bracket.html
For the record, I also have an NIT seed list you can find at https://numbergurubracketology.substack.com/
Awesome, didn’t know about this!
Do you see a scenario in which Belmont does not get in?
Why do you see Missouri State in as a 6 seed but Drake not making the field?
Our model projected Missouri State as the last team in and Drake as the first team out. This was yesterday morning’s projection, and it’s important to note that the two are so close that changes around them could cause the two to flip. The variables making the difference are NET, in Missouri State’s favor, and SOR, in Drake’s favor, so if Drake’s SOR rises further or Missouri State’s NET falls, Drake would leapfrog the Bears.
Overall, their résumés are extremely comparable. If recency bias plays in, Drake would probably get the nod. If the head-to-head series matters, Missouri State would probably get the nod. We haven’t seen too much data to support either of those as determining variables, though, so we don’t include them in our model. At this stage, with so much yet to happen around them on the bubble and with automatic bids, it’s more likely that both make it or both miss it than it is that just one of the two makes the field, though that of course could still happen too.
The only scenario I can think of, and this is a longshot, is if there are a huge number of automatic bids and other teams around them—Colorado, Virginia, South Carolina, St. John’s—put together great runs in their conference tournaments. Belmont looks about as safe as an NIT team can look right now.
Any chance of Stanford getting into NIT?
It doesn’t look like it. 84th and higher in all the ratings systems the team sheet includes (78th-best résumé in the country is currently our last at-large bid), only won 25% of their Q1 games, record right at .500…all probably too much dead weight, without anything too big and splashy to pull them upwards.