Week of 1/19 Bracketology

Fighter of the Nightman · Jan 19, 2026

EmpoweredIllini said:
Now we're getting kind of weird imo

Despite all of the readily available information says they do not use it.... well, they actually do, but it's just subliminal lol

I mean, your distinction is also sort of semantics. The fact that the AP Poll isn't on a team's sheet when the Selection Committee is choosing seeds (i.e., "They do not use it") and only ends up being a good predictor of a team's seed by coincidence is actually sort of an irrelevant thing to distinguish at the end of the day. The point is, it's not some worthless ranking with no correlation to the selection process, and reiterating that the Committee members themselves don't actively look at it as a factor while seeding teams doesn't really not dispute this.

Anyway, one thing that IS absolutely considered and is often very close to predicting seeds is NET Ranking ... and the Illini are officially in #2 seed territory there! Obviously it isn't gospel, but here are the top 4 seeds since the 2022 NCAA Tournament, sorted by NET Ranking.

#1 Seeds
#1 Gonzaga (2022)
#1 Houston (2023)
#1 Houston (2024)
#1 Duke (2025)
#2 Arizona (2022)
#2 Alabama (2023)
#2 UConn (2024)
#2 Auburn (2025)
#3 Purdue (2024)
#3 Houston (2025)
----- #3.4 Average -----
#4 Baylor (2022)
#4 Florida (2025)
#5 Purdue (2023)
#6 Kansas (2022)
#8 North Carolina (2024)
#9 Kansas (2023)

#2 Seeds
#3 UCLA (2023)
#4 Arizona (2024)
#5 Kentucky (2022)
#5 Tennessee (2025)
#6 Iowa State (2024)
#6 Alabama (2025)
#7 Texas (2023)
#7 Tennessee (2024)
#8 Villanova (2022)
----- #8.4 Average -----
#10 Arizona (2023)
#11 Auburn (2022)
#11 Michigan State (2025)
#12 Duke (2022)
#12 Marquette (2023)
#13 St. John's (NY) [2025]
#14 Marquette (2024)

#3 Seeds
#6 Gonzaga (2023)
#7 Tennessee (2022)
#7 Texas Tech (2025)
#9 Texas Tech (2022)
#9 Iowa State (2025)
#11 Creighton (2024)
#13 Purdue (2022)
#13 Illinois (2024)
----- #13.9 Average -----
#14 Kentucky (2025)
#15 Baylor (2023)
#15 Baylor (2024)
#15 Wisconsin (2025)
#18 Kentucky (2024)
#22 Xavier (2023)
#24 Wisconsin (2022)
#24 Kansas State (2023)

#4 Seeds
#4 Tennessee (2023)
#5 Auburn (2024)
#8 UConn (2023)
#9 Alabama (2024)
#10 UCLA (2022)
#10 Duke (2024)
#10 Maryland (2025)
#12 Arizona (2025)
#15 Illinois (2022)
----- #15.5 Average -----
#18 Texas A&M (2025)
#19 Kansas (2024)
#19 Purdue (2025)
#20 Arkansas (2022)
#27 Virginia (2023)
#30 Indiana (2023)
#32 Providence (2022)

I find it interesting how much more variability there is as you move down ... it's almost like the Committee takes its own ranking system a bit less rigidly as you get away from the truly top seeds. Anyway, while there are obvious outliers like #4 Tennessee (2023) getting a #4 seed, 25 of the 27 teams with a NET of #7 or better got a top 3 seed, and 22 out of 27 got a top 2 seed. So, we are in a great spot!

Piotyr · Jan 19, 2026

One other thing to note is as you move down, teams typically are closer together in rating so the separation between teams is very minute.

NarrowJ · Jan 19, 2026

Fighter of the Nightman said:
I mean, your distinction is also sort of semantics. The fact that the AP Poll isn't on a team's sheet when the Selection Committee is choosing seeds (i.e., "They do not use it") and only ends up being a good predictor of a team's seed by coincidence is actually sort of an irrelevant thing to distinguish at the end of the day. The point is, it's not some worthless ranking with no correlation to the selection process, and reiterating that the Committee members themselves don't actively look at it as a factor while seeding teams doesn't really not dispute this.

Anyway, one thing that IS absolutely considered and is often very close to predicting seeds is NET Ranking ... and the Illini are officially in #2 seed territory there! Obviously it isn't gospel, but here are the top 4 seeds since the 2022 NCAA Tournament, sorted by NET Ranking.

#1 Seeds
#1 Gonzaga (2022)
#1 Houston (2023)
#1 Houston (2024)
#1 Duke (2025)
#2 Arizona (2022)
#2 Alabama (2023)
#2 UConn (2024)
#2 Auburn (2025)
#3 Purdue (2024)
#3 Houston (2025)
----- #3.4 Average -----
#4 Baylor (2022)
#4 Florida (2025)
#5 Purdue (2023)
#6 Kansas (2022)
#8 North Carolina (2024)
#9 Kansas (2023)

#2 Seeds
#3 UCLA (2023)
#4 Arizona (2024)
#5 Kentucky (2022)
#5 Tennessee (2025)
#6 Iowa State (2024)
#6 Alabama (2025)
#7 Texas (2023)
#7 Tennessee (2024)
#8 Villanova (2022)
----- #8.4 Average -----
#10 Arizona (2023)
#11 Auburn (2022)
#11 Michigan State (2025)
#12 Duke (2022)
#12 Marquette (2023)
#13 St. John's (NY) [2025]
#14 Marquette (2024)

#3 Seeds
#6 Gonzaga (2023)
#7 Tennessee (2022)
#7 Texas Tech (2025)
#9 Texas Tech (2022)
#9 Iowa State (2025)
#11 Creighton (2024)
#13 Purdue (2022)
#13 Illinois (2024)
----- #13.9 Average -----
#14 Kentucky (2025)
#15 Baylor (2023)
#15 Baylor (2024)
#15 Wisconsin (2025)
#18 Kentucky (2024)
#22 Xavier (2023)
#24 Wisconsin (2022)
#24 Kansas State (2023)

#4 Seeds
#4 Tennessee (2023)
#5 Auburn (2024)
#8 UConn (2023)
#9 Alabama (2024)
#10 UCLA (2022)
#10 Duke (2024)
#10 Maryland (2025)
#12 Arizona (2025)
#15 Illinois (2022)
----- #15.5 Average -----
#18 Texas A&M (2025)
#19 Kansas (2024)
#19 Purdue (2025)
#20 Arkansas (2022)
#27 Virginia (2023)
#30 Indiana (2023)
#32 Providence (2022)

I find it interesting how much more variability there is as you move down ... it's almost like the Committee takes its own ranking system a bit less rigidly as you get away from the truly top seeds. Anyway, while there are obvious outliers like #4 Tennessee (2023) getting a #4 seed, 25 of the 27 teams with a NET of #7 or better got a top 3 seed, and 22 out of 27 got a top 2 seed. So, we are in a great spot!

That's exactly what I see as well, its just semantics.

Does the AP Poll typically accurately reflect the seed you get? Probably, yes.

Is it directly used by the Tournament Committee? No, its not.

EmpoweredIllini · Jan 19, 2026

NarrowJ said:
That's exactly what I see as well, its just semantics.

Does the AP Poll typically accurately reflect the seed you get? Probably, yes.

Is it directly used by the Tournament Committee? No, its not.

right but you cant win an argument by changing the semantics lol

it was said the committee does not use ap poll

answer: 100 percent they do not

whether ap poll is any sort of otherwise separate barometer is irrelevant to what was originally stated

just because the ap poll has some level of accuracy, does not mean the committee uses it

EmeraldCityIllini · Jan 19, 2026

“Not all quad 1 games are created equal”

If season ended today I’d be screaming that that from the mountaintops in a competition between us and BYU for seeding

NarrowJ · Jan 19, 2026

EmpoweredIllini said:
right but you cant win an argument by changing the semantics lol

it was said the committee does not use ap poll

answer: 100 percent they do not

whether ap poll is any sort of otherwise separate barometer is irrelevant to what was originally stated

just because the ap poll has some level of accuracy, does not mean the committee uses it

I'm not sure if winning an argument is the goal of the people involved in the discussion, however, in the case that it were:

Fighter of the Nightman said:
I mean, your distinction is also sort of semantics. The fact that the AP Poll isn't on a team's sheet when the Selection Committee is choosing seeds (i.e., "They do not use it") and only ends up being a good predictor of a team's seed by coincidence is actually sort of an irrelevant thing to distinguish at the end of the day. The point is, it's not some worthless ranking with no correlation to the selection process, and reiterating that the Committee members themselves don't actively look at it as a factor while seeding teams doesn't really not dispute this.

Is a strawman. Literally nobody has called the AP Poll "a worthless ranking with no correlation". People have said the committee does not use the poll. That's it.

Fighter of the Nightman · Jan 19, 2026

NarrowJ said:
I'm not sure if winning an argument is the goal of the people involved in the discussion, however, in the case that it were:

Is a strawman. Literally nobody has called the AP Poll "a worthless ranking with no correlation". People have said the committee does not use the poll. That's it.

As you alluded to, I’m not really trying to win a formal debate where we attack each other’s specific points. I have seen posts over the many years I’ve been on this site expressing the general sentiment that the AP Poll is more or less worthless. And I drew on those memories as an example of an extreme view regarding its usefulness.

Illini2010-11 · Jan 19, 2026

This became an interesting read.

Illini are about where they should be at this point. Continue to win and move up the seed lines. We could very well be a 2 seed on many projections right now if Nebraska did not beat us with a buzzer beater. Good news is that there are plenty of quality opportunities left.

Illini2010-11 · Jan 19, 2026

Fighter of the Nightman said:
As you alluded to, I’m not really trying to win a formal debate where we attack each other’s specific points. I have seen posts over the many years I’ve been on this site expressing the general sentiment that the AP Poll is more or less worthless. And I drew on those memories as an example of an extreme view regarding its usefulness.

I think many of the extreme views come up because of a handful of teams that were severely underseeded in tourney compared to AP poll....gulp, like Loyola in 2021 where they were an 8 seed but ranked #17 in AP poll.

But it should never come as a surprise that the polls generally correlate to ultimate seeding, even if the committee does not use them at all in their selection and seeding process.

EmpoweredIllini · Jan 20, 2026

NarrowJ said:
I'm not sure if winning an argument is the goal of the people involved in the discussion

not sure I even thought it was an argument at all until someone replied to my saying I thought it was weird we were talking about 'committee is subject to subliminal messaging' with a sprawling defense of the general value of the poll, a position i agreed with just a single post earlier in the thread:

Illini2010-11 said:
I think many of the extreme views come up

but where were the extreme views? i literally said this:

EmpoweredIllini said:
It's useful to folks outside of that committee like all of us

so yeah nobody had any extreme views here, seems like someone was just shouting at clouds lol

RabidDawgClassic · Jan 20, 2026

I’m glad I came to this conversation late, otherwise I would’ve directed towards a discussion about the proper definition of irony.

GoodePodzMelendez · Jan 20, 2026

We can get to a 2 seed with the schedule we have left. We do not have any bad loses and several Q1 games left. This is Brad’s deepest and most balanced team he has had here. Take care of business and the seeding will work out fine. I do not believe we have been 2 seed since the Dickie Beal travel game of 84.

21ChampaignSt · Jan 20, 2026

GoodePodzMelendez said:
We can get to a 2 seed with the schedule we have left. We do not have any bad loses and several Q1 games left. This is Brad’s deepest and most balanced team he has had here. Take care of business and the seeding will work out fine. I do not believe we have been 2 seed since the Dickie Beal travel game of 84.

I'll go a step further. We can get to a 1 seed with the schedule we have left.

@Purdue
@Nebraska
@MSU
Michigan

All huge opportunities and I think each game is winnable. If we got 3 of 4, I think we'd be firmly in the 1 seed convo.

Not predicting we will but I also don't think it's a completely unrealistic pipe dream.

Piotyr · Jan 20, 2026

If Illinois doesn't lose another game this season, I like their chances for a 1 seed.

mysterio2525 · Jan 20, 2026

Piotyr said:
If Illinois doesn't lose another game this season, I like their chances for a 1 seed.

FreshlySqueezed · Jan 20, 2026

Still a 4 seed in The Athletic ($):

NCAA Tournament Bracket Watch: These mid-majors aren’t ‘mid’ — they’re making moves

It’s a tough era for the mid-major in men’s college basketball. But it’s a good week, thanks in part to some heroics from Miami (Ohio).

www.nytimes.com

Poe's Law · Jan 20, 2026

Fighter of the Nightman said:
I mean, your distinction is also sort of semantics. The fact that the AP Poll isn't on a team's sheet when the Selection Committee is choosing seeds (i.e., "They do not use it") and only ends up being a good predictor of a team's seed by coincidence is actually sort of an irrelevant thing to distinguish at the end of the day. The point is, it's not some worthless ranking with no correlation to the selection process, and reiterating that the Committee members themselves don't actively look at it as a factor while seeding teams doesn't really not dispute this.

Anyway, one thing that IS absolutely considered and is often very close to predicting seeds is NET Ranking ... and the Illini are officially in #2 seed territory there! Obviously it isn't gospel, but here are the top 4 seeds since the 2022 NCAA Tournament, sorted by NET Ranking.

#1 Seeds
#1 Gonzaga (2022)
#1 Houston (2023)
#1 Houston (2024)
#1 Duke (2025)
#2 Arizona (2022)
#2 Alabama (2023)
#2 UConn (2024)
#2 Auburn (2025)
#3 Purdue (2024)
#3 Houston (2025)
----- #3.4 Average -----
#4 Baylor (2022)
#4 Florida (2025)
#5 Purdue (2023)
#6 Kansas (2022)
#8 North Carolina (2024)
#9 Kansas (2023)

#2 Seeds
#3 UCLA (2023)
#4 Arizona (2024)
#5 Kentucky (2022)
#5 Tennessee (2025)
#6 Iowa State (2024)
#6 Alabama (2025)
#7 Texas (2023)
#7 Tennessee (2024)
#8 Villanova (2022)
----- #8.4 Average -----
#10 Arizona (2023)
#11 Auburn (2022)
#11 Michigan State (2025)
#12 Duke (2022)
#12 Marquette (2023)
#13 St. John's (NY) [2025]
#14 Marquette (2024)

#3 Seeds
#6 Gonzaga (2023)
#7 Tennessee (2022)
#7 Texas Tech (2025)
#9 Texas Tech (2022)
#9 Iowa State (2025)
#11 Creighton (2024)
#13 Purdue (2022)
#13 Illinois (2024)
----- #13.9 Average -----
#14 Kentucky (2025)
#15 Baylor (2023)
#15 Baylor (2024)
#15 Wisconsin (2025)
#18 Kentucky (2024)
#22 Xavier (2023)
#24 Wisconsin (2022)
#24 Kansas State (2023)

#4 Seeds
#4 Tennessee (2023)
#5 Auburn (2024)
#8 UConn (2023)
#9 Alabama (2024)
#10 UCLA (2022)
#10 Duke (2024)
#10 Maryland (2025)
#12 Arizona (2025)
#15 Illinois (2022)
----- #15.5 Average -----
#18 Texas A&M (2025)
#19 Kansas (2024)
#19 Purdue (2025)
#20 Arkansas (2022)
#27 Virginia (2023)
#30 Indiana (2023)
#32 Providence (2022)

I find it interesting how much more variability there is as you move down ... it's almost like the Committee takes its own ranking system a bit less rigidly as you get away from the truly top seeds. Anyway, while there are obvious outliers like #4 Tennessee (2023) getting a #4 seed, 25 of the 27 teams with a NET of #7 or better got a top 3 seed, and 22 out of 27 got a top 2 seed. So, we are in a great spot!

As you move down the bracket, you get teams shifted to avoid conference matchups or a top seed playing in somebody else’s backyard if possible if I’m not mistaken.

NarrowJ · Jan 20, 2026

FreshlySqueezed said:
Still a 4 seed in The Athletic ($):

NCAA Tournament Bracket Watch: These mid-majors aren’t ‘mid’ — they’re making moves

It’s a tough era for the mid-major in men’s college basketball. But it’s a good week, thanks in part to some heroics from Miami (Ohio).

www.nytimes.com

MSU a 3 seed:

NET ranking: Illinois 7, MSU 12
SOS: some sites have Illinois with the advantage, some have MSU
Quad1 W-L: MSU 5-2, Illinois 4-3 (Illinois 2-3 in Q1A, MSU is 0-2)
Efficiency: Illinois with the edge on KP & Torvik

Florida a 3 seed:

NET ranking: Illinois 7, Florida 15
SOS: some sites have Illinois with the advantage, some have Florida
Quad1 W-L: Illinois 4-3, Florida 5-5 (Illinois 2-3 in Q1A, Florida 1-3)
Efficiency: Illinois with the edge on KP & Torvik

BYU a 3 seed:

NET ranking: Illinois 7, BYU 11
SOS: some sites have Illinois with the advantage, some have BYU
Quad1 W-L: Illinois 4-3, BYU 4-2 (Illinois 2-3 in Q1A, BYU 1-2)
Efficiency: Illinois with a considerable edge on KP & Torvik

Houston a 3 seed:

NET ranking: Illinois 7, Houston 9
SOS: some sites have Illinois with the advantage, some have Houston
Quad1 W-L: Illinois 4-3, Houston 5-1 (Illinois 2-3 in Q1A, Houston 1-0)
Efficiency: Houston with the edge on KP & Torvik

I could make no argument we should be ahead of Houston, but the other 3 look pretty close to me right now?

GoodePodzMelendez · Jan 20, 2026

21ChampaignSt said:
I'll go a step further. We can get to a 1 seed with the schedule we have left.

@Purdue
@Nebraska
@MSU
Michigan

All huge opportunities and I think each game is winnable. If we got 3 of 4, I think we'd be firmly in the 1 seed convo.

Not predicting we will but I also don't think it's a completely unrealistic pipe dream.

We finish in the top 4 of the conference and win the B1G tourney, we will be in line for a one seed.

HereSoIDontGetFined · Jan 20, 2026

Illinois is probably a difficult call right now. Lots of inferior opponents in the last few weeks. They're deserving of their rankings and all. But until that Purdue game begins the ramp-up in quality, I don't think the nation is quite ready to put us on those top two seed lines. It's fair.

Fighter of the Nightman · Jan 20, 2026

Poe's Law said:
As you move down the bracket, you get teams shifted to avoid conference matchups or a top seed playing in somebody else’s backyard if possible if I’m not mistaken.

For sure. There is at least some complaining every single year about the eventual bracket, but man ... I don't envy the Selection Committee's job (other than it would be super interesting). They have a lot of teems to place and a lot of factors to consider.

FreshlySqueezed · Jan 20, 2026

NarrowJ said:
MSU a 3 seed:

NET ranking: Illinois 7, MSU 12
SOS: some sites have Illinois with the advantage, some have MSU
Quad1 W-L: MSU 5-2, Illinois 4-3 (Illinois 2-3 in Q1A, MSU is 0-2)
Efficiency: Illinois with the edge on KP & Torvik

Florida a 3 seed:

NET ranking: Illinois 7, Florida 15
SOS: some sites have Illinois with the advantage, some have Florida
Quad1 W-L: Illinois 4-3, Florida 5-5 (Illinois 2-3 in Q1A, Florida 1-3)
Efficiency: Illinois with the edge on KP & Torvik

BYU a 3 seed:

NET ranking: Illinois 7, BYU 11
SOS: some sites have Illinois with the advantage, some have BYU
Quad1 W-L: Illinois 4-3, BYU 4-2 (Illinois 2-3 in Q1A, BYU 1-2)
Efficiency: Illinois with a considerable edge on KP & Torvik

Houston a 3 seed:

NET ranking: Illinois 7, Houston 9
SOS: some sites have Illinois with the advantage, some have Houston
Quad1 W-L: Illinois 4-3, Houston 5-1 (Illinois 2-3 in Q1A, Houston 1-0)
Efficiency: Houston with the edge on KP & Torvik

I could make no argument we should be ahead of Houston, but the other 3 look pretty close to me right now?

That was my initial thought upon looking at the bracket as well. You laid out the data and I agree... Houston is clearly ahead of us on the S-curve right now but the other 3? Very questionable.

OrangeBlue98 · Jan 20, 2026

Piotyr said:
If Illinois doesn't lose another game this season, I like their chances for a 1 seed.

I’ll go one farther. If Illinois doesn’t lose another game this season, I like their odds to win the national championship!

This take brought to you by….

Calvin · Jan 20, 2026

One wrinkle IMO is that losing close games to good teams doesn't really hurt your analytics, but does hurt your seeding. Our 3 losses were great opportunities, but they were losses. That puts us behind more teams in reality than it does in the analytics. Gotta play well through the tough part of the schedule.

From the cheap seats · Jan 20, 2026

For what it's worth (not much), Lunardi has the Illini a #3 seed in the Midwest. Michigan is the #1 seed, Houston #2 and Florida #4 in the MW. I don't think Houston can go to the South Region because it is in Houston. Therefore, Nebraska is the #2 in the South. Purdue is the #2 in the East. Michigan State is a #3 seed in the West.

Week of 1/19 Bracketology

Iowa is not in a great spot right now (LvilleILL1)