2024 Men's NCAA Tournament Bracket: Latest Projection of the Field of 68

With less than 50 days remaining until Selection Sunday for the 2024 men's NCAA tournament, projected No. 1 seeds Purdue, Connecticut, Houston and North Carolina are firmly on that top line. That could change, but it feels like each has at least a 70 percent chance of ending up as a No. 1 seed.

What's nowhere near firm these days, however, is the bubble.

Even some of our projected No. 7 seeds could be just one bad loss away from re-entering the danger zone, while there are about 25 teams not currently in the field that could be one big win away from vaulting into the mix.

But that's business as usual toward the end of January, isn't it?

By the end of February, it's likely at least a dozen of these bubble teams will have all but locked up a bid via quality wins, while at least a dozen others will have vanished from the conversation altogether via bad/too many losses.

You'll see a lot of NET, RES and QUAL in the forthcoming analysis. NET is the NCAA Evaluation Tool, the backbone of the Quads data and the primary sorting metric the selection committee uses to select and seed the field. RES is the average ranking of the two resume metrics (KPI and SOR) and is more or less a measure of who you beat, regardless of scoring margin. QUAL is the average ranking of the two predictive metrics (BPI and KenPom) and is rooted in scoring margin and adjusted efficiencies. All three play a key role in determining the projected field.

Also of note, almost* all projected automatic bids are based on predictive metrics. Most bracketologists use conference records to make those selections, but our preference is to go with the best team in the eyes of the analytics.

With that out of the way, let's start with the full bracket before some brief commentary on the current state of the bubble and the top seed line. Following that, a full conference-by-conference rundown, highlighting some of the biggest changes from one week ago.

*James Madison's predictive metrics remain slightly better than Appalachian State's, but we have the Mountaineers as the projected Sun Belt champion now that they have a season sweep of the Dukes.

EAST REGION (BOSTON)

Brooklyn, NY
No. 1 Connecticut vs. No. 16 Quinnipiac
No. 8 Utah vs. No. 9 Texas A&M

Spokane, WA
No. 4 Baylor vs. No. 13 Akron
No. 5 Utah State vs. No. 12 Appalachian State

Pittsburgh, PA
No. 3 Dayton vs. No. 14 Vermont
No. 6 Florida Atlantic vs. No. 11 Saint Mary's

Indianapolis, IN
No. 2 Wisconsin vs. No. 15 Youngstown State
No. 7 South Carolina vs. No. 10 Indiana State

MIDWEST REGION (DETROIT)

Indianapolis, IN
No. 1 Purdue vs. No. 16 Merrimack/South Dakota State
No. 8 St. John's vs. No. 9 Memphis

Brooklyn, NY
No. 4 Kentucky vs. No. 13 Samford
No. 5 Oklahoma vs. No. 12 Princeton

Omaha, NE
No. 3 Kansas vs. No. 14 Morehead State
No. 6 San Diego State vs. No. 11 Cincinnati

Omaha, NE
No. 2 Marquette vs. No. 15 Colgate
No. 7 Auburn vs. No. 10 Colorado State

SOUTH REGION (DALLAS)

Memphis, TN
No. 1 Houston vs. No. 16 Lipscomb
No. 8 Northwestern vs. No. 9 Boise State

Spokane, WA
No. 4 Duke vs. No. 13 UC Irvine
No. 5 Texas Tech vs. No. 12 Grand Canyon

Memphis, TN
No. 3 Creighton vs. No. 14 Louisiana Tech
No. 6 New Mexico vs. No. 11 Nebraska/Washington State

Charlotte, NC
No. 2 Tennessee vs. No. 15 High Point
No. 7 Clemson vs. No. 10 Mississippi State

WEST REGION (LOS ANGELES)

Charlotte, NC
No. 1 North Carolina vs. No. 16 Southern/Norfolk State
No. 8 TCU vs. No. 9 Seton Hall

Salt Lake City, UT
No. 4 Iowa State vs. No. 13 McNeese State
No. 5 Illinois vs. No. 12 Texas/Providence

Pittsburgh, PA
No. 3 Alabama vs. No. 14 Drexel
No. 6 BYU*** vs. No. 11 Florida

Salt Lake City, UT
No. 2 Arizona vs. No. 15 Eastern Washington
No. 7 Ole Miss vs. No. 10 Michigan State

***BYU's true overall seed (No. 18) should land the Cougars on the No. 5 seed line. However, because there are five Big 12 teams in the Nos. 4-5 seed range, because BYU will play at least two games against each of the Big 12's current No. 4 seeds and because BYU does not play on Sunday for religious reasons, it is moved to a No. 6 seed, with No. 21 Utah State moving up in its place on the No. 5 line.

1. Purdue Boilermakers (19-2, NET: 2, RES: 1.0, QUAL: 2.0)

2. Connecticut Huskies (18-2, NET: 5, RES: 4.0, QUAL: 4.5)

3. Houston Cougars (19-2, NET: 1, RES: 3.5, QUAL: 1.0)

4. North Carolina Tar Heels (17-3, NET: 8, RES: 3.0, QUAL: 7.5)

5. Tennessee Volunteers (15-4, NET: 3, RES: 4.5, QUAL: 4.0)

Rarely is the top tier of four teams as cut and dry as it is right now.

The only real debate to be had is whether Connecticut or Houston is more deserving of the No. 2 overall seed.

To that end, we lean ever so slightly in favor of the Huskies because of the divide in Q2. They have more or less the same Q1 resume, and Houston has the better metrics. But Connecticut's two wins against the top half of Q2 are a bit of a tiebreaker at the moment.

That said, if Houston were to win at Kansas this coming Saturday, that would push the Cougars ahead of UConn and legitimately into a conversation with Purdue for No. 1 overall. (Though, the Boilermakers could surge somewhat comfortably back ahead with a win at Wisconsin on Sunday.)

North Carolina's head-to-head victory over Tennessee—even though the game was played in Chapel Hill—sort of keeps the Volunteers at bay as a strong but distant No. 5 overall seed. Neither team has a bad loss. UNC is 4-3 against Quad 1 and Tennessee is 3-4. That game truly is the difference here.

Like Houston, Tennessee could make a serious push with a win at Kentucky on Saturday. However, if North Carolina wins its home game against Duke on the same day, there won't be much ground for the Vols to gain.

Fifth-to-Last In: Florida Gators (14-6, NET: 39, RES: 35.0, QUAL: 33.0)—Ultimate bubble resume: No Q1 wins; no remotely bad losses.

Fourth-to-Last In: Washington State Cougars (15-6, NET: 40, RES: 50.0, QUAL: 50.5)—Splashing in out of nowhere after sweeping Colorado and Utah.

Third-to-Last In: Nebraska Cornhuskers (15-6, NET: 60, RES: 32.5, QUAL: 59.0)—Got blitzed at Maryland to land back on the bubble.

Second-to-Last In: Providence Friars (14-6, NET: 51, RES: 51.0, QUAL: 43.5)—Let's just say it's good Providence didn't lose to Georgetown.

Last Team In: Texas Longhorns (14-7, NET: 41, RES: 52.0, QUAL: 32.5)—Three Q1 wins? Good. 5-7 against top three Quads? Yikes.

****CUT LINE****

First Team Out: Colorado Buffaloes (15-6, NET: 29, NET: 43.0, QUAL: 38.5)—Solid resume, but lacking a marquee win. Saturday at Utah?

Second Team Out: Kansas State Wildcats (14-6, NET: 73, RES: 48.5, QUAL: 55.5)—Been on bubble all season. Tuesday vs. Oklahoma looms large.

Third Team Out: Syracuse Orange (13-6, NET: 78, RES: 29.5, QUAL: 87.0)—The resume metrics? Superb. The actual resume? Not so much.

Fourth Team Out: Villanova Wildcats (11-9, NET: 43, RES: 63.0, QUAL: 36.5)—Several great wins, but too close to .500 overall record.

Fifth Team Out: Richmond Spiders (15-5, NET: 70, RES: 48.5, QUAL: 77.5)—Win over Dayton was Richmond's sixth against top two Quads.

3 Teams in the Projected Field (by Overall Seed): 4. North Carolina, 15. Duke, 27. Clemson

Also Considered: Syracuse, Virginia Tech, Florida State, Virginia, Wake Forest, Miami

Biggest Change: The growing logjam of ACC bubble teams

Though presently only projected for three bids, it would be a bit shocking if the ACC ends up with fewer than five teams in the NCAA tournament.

That's not because the ACC has put at least five teams into every NCAA tournament since its four-bid year in 2013, but rather because a couple of squads will eventually separate from that gigantic bubble cluster, right?

Each of the six "Also Considered" teams above entered play Monday with at least four Q1/Q2 wins, and the only one that didn't have at least one Q1 win was Wake Forest.

Moreover, all six were 60th or better in the resume metrics, with Syracuse especially sitting pretty at 29.5.

Both Syracuse and Florida State have not-great NET and predictive metrics. Miami has both a Q3 and a Q4 loss. Virginia plays like garbage away from home. Wake Forest has the aforementioned dearth of Q1 wins. And Virginia Tech narrowly misses the cut with eight losses and a resume that is just kind of "mid" across the board.

They're all in the hunt, though, and with a whole lot of head-to-head opportunities still to come. They'll also each get at least one more shot against either Duke or North Carolina.

Whether Clemson—with losses in five of its past seven games—can avoid joining the ACC's bubble brigade is a topic for another day. But if the Tigers were to lose at home to Louisville on Tuesday, they would sink like a lead balloon.

10 Teams in the Projected Field (by Overall Seed): 3. Houston, 9. Kansas, 13. Iowa State, 16. Baylor, 17. Oklahoma, 18. BYU, 19. Texas Tech, 32. TCU, 42. Cincinnati, 47. Texas

Also Considered: Kansas State

Biggest Change: Iowa State knocking on the door of a No. 3 seed; Texas Tech jumps to a No. 5 seed

We've spent a lot of time this season bemoaning the pathetic nonconference schedules that most of the Big 12 teams cobbled together.

And with good reason. Literally half of the league—UCF, Oklahoma State, TCU, Iowa State, Texas Tech, Cincinnati and BYU—has a NCSOS rank outside the top 290. Oklahoma, Texas and Kansas State are all in the 250 range. Only Kansas (42) and Baylor (86) rank in the top 170.

But if you can hold your own in the relentless grind that is Big 12 conference play, who needs quality nonconference wins?

That seems to be the mindset that a lot of Big 12 teams had in mapping out their November and December plans. So far, however, only Iowa State (5-2) and Texas Tech (5-1) have really capitalized on their constant onslaught of opportunities in league play.

The Cyclones took care of business at home this week against both Kansas and Kansas State. Coupled with the home win over Houston on Jan. 9 and the road win over TCU two Saturdays ago, they now have three wins against the top half of Quad 1, zero losses outside of Quad 1 and great metrics across the board.

Incredibly, Iowa State was our third team out just three weeks ago, but its resume metrics have skyrocketed from 77.0 to 19.0. And if the Cyclones can add another marquee win at Baylor this coming Saturday, they just might be a No. 2 seed in our first February projection.

Meanwhile, Texas Tech—whose best nonconference win was probably the neutral-court game against Michigan?—sits alone in first place in the Big 12 standings following a monumental road win over Oklahoma. The Red Raiders also opened Big 12 play with a road win over Texas and scored a big home win over BYU last week.

Like ISU, TTU now has three stellar wins and no losses outside of Q1. The Red Raiders' metrics aren't quite as great as the Cyclones', but it does feel like they are almost a lock to make the dance at this point, provided they do a reasonably good job of protecting their home court the rest of the way.

6 Teams in the Projected Field (by Overall Seed): 2. Connecticut, 8. Marquette, 10. Creighton, 29. St. John's, 35. Seton Hall, 46. Providence

Also Considered: Villanova

Biggest Change: Villanova's loss total has officially become a big problem

There are only a handful of teams with a better collection of four top wins than Villanova's road win over Creighton and neutral-site victories over North Carolina, Texas Tech and Memphis.

But at 11-9 overall following losses at St. John's and Butler in the past week, the Wildcats simply have too many losses to be legitimately considered for an at-large bid anymore.

It isn't even the three bad losses to Penn, Drexel and Saint Joseph's. Those don't help, of course, but they weren't a disqualifying factor prior to now.

It's simply that at-large bids don't get awarded to teams unless they're at least three games above .500.

That's not an official criterion for selection, mind you, but the last team to get an at-large bid with a record worse than three games above .500 was Georgia going 16-14 and inexplicably getting a No. 8 seed all the way back in 2001.

Even getting in at three games above .500 is highly unusual, with 2022 Michigan (17-14) on the short list of teams to pull that off.

Long story short: Villanova has a lot of win-piling to do down the stretch, and it has already played both of its games against DePaul.

The Wildcats also just don't have great computer numbers anymore, down to 63.0 in the resume metrics. So, not only do they need wins, but they're going to need a few good ones.

6 Teams in the Projected Field (by Overall Seed): 1. Purdue, 6. Wisconsin, 20. Illinois, 30. Northwestern, 40. Michigan State, 45. Nebraska

Also Considered: N/A

Biggest Change: Northwestern starting to solidify their bid

First things first, that N/A above is a bit misleading. Iowa, Maryland and Ohio State are each at least a little bit on the radar. But even if our "First Five Out" was a "First 15 Out," they probably still wouldn't make the cut.

One team absolutely making the cut these days, though, is Northwestern.

Per usual—save for the preposterous loss to Chicago State—the Wildcats took care of business at home this week. They beat Illinois in overtime, followed by a 25-point rout of Ohio State. They now have four excellent home wins (Purdue, Dayton, Michigan State and Illinois) as well as a pair of solid home wins (Maryland and Ohio State).

But could Northwestern please get a decent win or two outside of Welsh-Ryan Arena?

The Wildcats already have one of the worst nonconference strengths of schedule in the nation, and pairing that with a resume devoid of quality wins away from home is just giving the selection committee extra reason to under-seed them or leave them out of the field altogether.

That's why even with those great wins and a 15-5 record, Northwestern is still merely a No. 8 seed and hovering on the bubble. (Though, a No. 8 seed is significant improvement from one week ago, when the Wildcats were among our Last Four In.)

They have two gigantic road games remaining, Wednesday night at Purdue and on March 6 at Michigan State. If they don't win either of those road games, they might need to win at least three of the other four (Minnesota, Rutgers, Indiana and Maryland) and continue to take care of business at home in order to feel assured of a bid.

5 Teams in the Projected Field (by Overall Seed): 21. Utah State, 22. San Diego State, 23. New Mexico, 36. Boise State, 38. Colorado State

Also Considered: Nevada

Biggest Change: Colorado State is in a tailspin

Four weeks ago, Colorado State was clearly the Mountain West's best case for a protected (top four) seed. We had the Rams at No. 14 overall with San Diego State (No. 21 overall) the only other team in the league projected for better than a No. 8 seed. And that was even before the Jan. 2 victory over New Mexico that pushed the Rams to 13-1 on the year.

Since then, however, Colorado State has fallen apart at the seams, losing four consecutive road games against Utah State, Boise State, Nevada and Wyoming. And in the middle of those losses, the Rams just barely won at home against Air Force and UNLV, who notably are nowhere close to the at-large conversation.

The overtime loss to Wyoming this past Saturday was the real dagger.

Missing out on opportunities for Q1 wins against those other three at-large candidates didn't necessarily hurt the Rams' resume so much as it kept them from building up a good cushion in case they did suffer a bad loss.

Now, at 30th or worse in all of the metrics with a Q3 loss to boot, things have gotten bubble-y for Colorado State.

It does still have two games against San Diego State, as well as the home rematches against each of Utah State, Boise State and Nevada. And that 21-point win over Creighton on a neutral floor on Thanksgiving is still doing quite a bit of heavy lifting.

However, the Rams have plummeted to a No. 10 seed and could further slip toward the cut line if they don't win the home game against San Diego State on Tuesday night.

3 Teams in the Projected Field (by Overall Seed): 7. Arizona, 31. Utah, 44. Washington State

Also Considered: Colorado, Oregon

Biggest Change: How do you do, Cougars?

We'll get to Washington State in a moment, but we need to start the Pac-12 discussion by addressing Arizona still projected for a No. 2 seed.

After the loss at Oregon State on Thursday night—the Wildcats' third questionable L in less than a month—the fervor with which people were writing off Arizona as undeserving of even a top-four seed was palpable.

Here's the deal, though: Arizona is one of just three teams with at least four wins against the top half of Quad 1, and one of just seven teams with at least eight Q1/Q2 victories. The Wildcats are also fourth in NET, top four in the predictive metrics and top 10 in the resume metrics. And at least they bounced back from that awful loss to Oregon State with a convincing, quality road win over Oregon.

Yeah, their play as of late has been...inconsistent and oftentimes downright uninspired. But the quality wins they stacked up in November and December haven't gone anywhere, and this is still clearly one of the eight best tournament resumes if you can ignore the recency bias.

And thanks in part to a home win over that top-eight resume a few weeks ago, welcome to the field, Washington State.

We left the Cougars for dead last week after a bad loss to Cal, but they bounced back in a massive way with home wins over both Colorado and Utah—emphatically stomping the Utes by 22 points.

Heading into play this past Wednesday, Washington State was 57th in NET and 60th on KenPom. But as of Monday morning, the Cougars had risen the equivalent of four full seed lines in each metric, to 40th in NET and 44th on KenPom.

The nonconference strength of schedule (ranked 311th) is more than a little concerning, as are the losses to Santa Clara and Cal. But they're now 2-3 vs. Q1 and 6-5 against Q1/Q2 with solid metrics across the board. That's good enough for right now on what is a hideous bubble.

9 Teams in the Projected Field (by Overall Seed): 5. Tennessee, 12. Alabama, 14. Kentucky, 25. South Carolina, 26. Auburn, 28. Ole Miss, 33. Texas A&M, 39. Mississippi State, 43. Florida

Also Considered: Georgia

Biggest Change: The curious case of Auburn's resume

Auburn is all but certain to make the dance and would be a trendy Elite Eight pick—maybe even a sleeper national champion pick—if the NCAA tournament started today.

The Tigers entered Monday top-9 in NET and top-9 in the predictive metrics, putting them in a club with Connecticut, Houston, Purdue, Tennessee, Arizona, North Carolina and Alabama.

But after road losses this week to Alabama and Mississippi State, where in the world are we supposed to seed this resume?

The Tigers are now 0-3 against Q1, making them the only NET Top-30 team without at least one Q1 victory. They also have a Q2 loss to Appalachian State.

But because they have a healthy stockpile of Q2 wins, because each and every one of their wins came by a double-digit margin and because all four of their losses were by six points or fewer, the metrics adore them.

At some point, though, quality wins are a must.

Houston was in a similar boat two years ago. Those Cougars had sensational metrics, finishing third in NET and third in the predictives. But they went just 1-4 against Quad 1, not getting that best victory until Selection Sunday in the AAC championship against Memphis. They ended up getting a No. 5 seed.

Might be a bit low on Auburn now with the drop to a No. 7 seed, but would you please go get a quality win?

26 Teams in the Projected Field (by Overall Seed): 11. Dayton, 24. Florida Atlantic, 34. Memphis, 37. Indiana State, 41. Saint Mary's, 48. Grand Canyon, 49. Princeton, 50. Appalachian State, 51. McNeese State, 52. Samford, 53. UC Irvine, 54. Akron, 55. Vermont, 56. Louisiana Tech, 57. Drexel, 58. Morehead State, 59. High Point, 60. Eastern Washington, 61. Youngstown State, 62. Colgate, 63. Lipscomb, 64. Quinnipiac, 65. Southern, 66. Norfolk State, 67. South Dakota State, 68. Merrimack

Also Considered: Richmond, Gonzaga, Drake

Biggest Changes: Princeton plummets, App State arrives, Dayton loses but stays put

It was not a banner week for the always-beloved tier of 'mid-majors with a realistic at-large pulse.'

As the only team in the country with fewer than two losses, Princeton had been hovering in our No. 8-9 seed range, but perilously so. It had not even played a Quad 1 game, let alone won one, so its case for an at-large bid was mostly tied to the fact that it only had one loss.

But following Saturday's blowout loss at Cornell, I simply cannot see Princeton's path to an at-large bid any longer. Not only did the Tigers acquire a second Q2 loss, but they lost two of their three Q2 wins with both their neutral win over Rutgers and road win over Hofstra sliding into Q3 territory.

James Madison's case for an at-large bid also likely died on Saturday in the loss to Appalachian State.

Though, now that the Mountaineers have a season sweep of JMU to go along with a great win over Auburn back in December, so are they starting to make a case for an at-large bid? With four Q3/Q4 losses, it's only plausible if they win every remaining game prior to a loss to JMU in the Sun Belt championship, but we haven't entirely ruled out the possibility.

Lastly, Dayton took a loss at Richmond on a rare awful night from star big man DaRon Holmes II. But the Flyers still have a strong case for a No. 3 seed, as that was merely a Q1 loss. They are now 3-3 against the top quadrant with no other losses. They also still rank top-10 in the resume metrics.

The loss likely eliminates what little chance Dayton had of playing its way up to a No. 1 seed and leaves the Flyers one more loss away from possibly getting punished in the seeding. They remain in good standing for now, though.