![\"basketball\"](\"https:\/\/substackcdn.com\/image\/fetch\/$s_!Dg1r!,f_auto,q_auto:good,fl_progressive:steep\/https%3A%2F%2Fsubstack-post-media.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fpublic%2Fimages%2F0c52d09a-6ecf-4e59-8f06-54d2a1d93d6c_1500x682.png\" "\\"basketball\\"")
<\/picture><\/div>\n<\/a><\/figure>\n<\/div>\n
See also: <\/span>Women\u2019s March Madness Predictions<\/a>, <\/span>Men\u2019s COOPER ratings<\/a>.<\/span><\/h5>\nUpdated March 18, 2026<\/strong><\/h5>\nWe\u2019ve updated our projections with the results of tonight\u2019s First Four games in Dayton. But almost every office pool starts on Thursday, once the field is reduced to 64 teams, so you still have plenty of time to fill out your picks.<\/p>\n
We also added new injury data earlier tonight. There were no major changes, but we now have a <\/span>more pessimistic timeline<\/a> for any return of Duke\u2019s Caleb Foster. We also toned down the effect of injuries in an update last night.<\/span>1<\/a><\/p>\nWe\u2019ve set up the spreadsheet to include an archive of all previous predictions so you can see the effect of these changes. We\u2019ll continue to update the projections as games are completed<\/span>.<\/strong><\/em> <\/span>-NS<\/strong>, 3\/18\/26<\/strong><\/em><\/p>\nSure, it might seem like the world\u2019s gone a little crazy. But at least we\u2019ll be getting a dose of March Madness. The NCAA tournament is perhaps our very favorite event here at Silver Bulletin.<\/span>2<\/a> In fact, the tournament really needs no introduction. I\u2019ve been running versions of these projections since 2011, almost ten years before I\u2019d even heard of Substack.<\/span><\/p>\nBut <\/span>pretty much every part of the model has changed at some point<\/a>. Instead of compiling other people\u2019s projections, we now mostly rely on our own in the form of our new <\/span>COOPER ratings<\/a> \u2014 although we blend them with <\/span>Ken Pomeroy\u2019s ratings<\/a> (because we think Pomeroy is pretty much the best, present company excluded.) We\u2019ve also upgraded our technology stack. Believe it or not, until last year, part of the work for our NCAA model was still being done in Microsoft Excel.<\/span>3<\/a> Now we\u2019ve built the code to run proper simulations \u2014 100,000 at a time \u2014 which enables more sophisticated handling of injuries (and there are a lot of them this year), among other things. This isn\u2019t an \u201cAI-driven\u201d model quite yet, though Claude and other AI tools are increasingly helping us smooth out some of the code’s rough patches and turn these numbers around more quickly.<\/span><\/p>\nStill, March Madness is eternal. If nothing else, there will be upsets: we\u2019ve calculated that the odds of having a perfect bracket are on the order of 1 in 10 quintillion. I guess I\u2019ll just have to concede that we\u2019re living in a simulation if it happens.<\/p>\n
\n- \n
This is what we call a landing page, meaning that both the numbers and the text will change. We strongly recommend checking out the <\/span>web version with this link<\/a><\/strong>, which provides for better rendering of charts than the Substack app or email.<\/span><\/p>\n<\/li>\n- \n
We\u2019ll update these numbers once per day after tournament games are played. In the interest of underpromising and hopefully overdelivering, sometimes the update will need to wait until the morning, but we\u2019re hoping to get it out in the evening most of the time.<\/p>\n<\/li>\n
- \n
The ratings give 5\/8ths of the weight to COOPER and 3\/8ths to Pomeroy. There are lots of other systems out there, but basically, that\u2019s the mix I\u2019d use if I were betting on the games myself.<\/p>\n<\/li>\n
- \n
They also account for injuries, travel distance, and \u2014 once the tournament is underway \u2014 how teams have performed so far in the tourney relative to the model\u2019s expectations. (Early-round over- or underperformance is often fairly predictive of what happens later on.) For more details about how all of this works behind the scenes, see our <\/span>methodology page<\/a>.<\/span><\/p>\n<\/li>\n- \n
Women\u2019s projections are now ready also and can be found <\/span>here<\/a>.<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n<\/li>\n<\/ul>\nLet\u2019s start with the overall leaders:<\/p>\n
In the forecasts we issued last night, Arizona surprised us by being a slight overall favorite, but now that we\u2019ve toned down the effect of injury adjustments (see above), it\u2019s more of a three-way tie between the Wildcats, Duke and Michigan. We would argue that Arizona is a bit underrated. They are healthier than the other favorites, plus Arizona has a slight travel advantage, as teams have to trek across the country to play them in the West region, and a relatively easy draw. But our ratings do have Michigan and Duke as slightly better teams at full strength.<\/p>\n
Overall, there\u2019s fairly strong alignment between who we think are the best teams and the most likely winners. A team\u2019s draw can matter, but it tends to matter less for the elite programs. By the time you get to the Final Four, there\u2019s usually no way around having to beat tough competition.<\/p>\n
The rest of this page contains:<\/p>\n
\n- \n
Region-by-region projections of each team\u2019s chances of advancing to each round, plus my first thoughts on each region. Analysis of the East region is free for everyone, while the rest is a bonus for paid subscribers.<\/p>\n<\/li>\n
- \n
Odds for forthcoming games (win probabilities, point spreads, totals, etc.)<\/p>\n<\/li>\n
- \n
A comparison of the ratings systems used in the projections and the impact of injuries.<\/p>\n<\/li>\n
- \n
And a spreadsheet version of these projections. We\u2019re hoping to archive these so you\u2019ll be able to see how our odds have evolved throughout the tournament.<\/p>\n<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n
Full disclosure: once the tournament gets underway, we\u2019ll cut back on some of the text you\u2019re seeing below to get you the updated numbers as quickly as possible.<\/p>\n
Our tour begins in the East:<\/p>\n
Duke is a great team \u2014 COOPER thinks they have a chance to rank among the all-time great teams if they win out, in fact. But the selection committee didn\u2019t really do them any favors. St. John\u2019s, which just won the Big East, is significantly under-seeded as a #5. Our models tend to like the Big East relative to consensus \u2014 a lot of UConn and Villanova championships over the years have endorsed that view \u2014 and would actually view the Johnnies as a candidate for a #3 seed or even a #2. Speaking of UConn, they\u2019re in the bottom half of this bracket, along with Michigan State. While there\u2019s not any factor in COOPER for past tournament success <\/span>per se<\/em>, I would note that its ratings carry over partly from year to year. So somewhere deep in its recesses is a lot of respect for what the Spartans and Huskies have accomplished over the years.<\/span><\/p>\nBut while it\u2019s liable to produce some great Sweet Sixteen and Elite Eight games, we\u2019re disappointed to tell you that the East isn\u2019t the best candidate for early-round upsets. Even #8 Ohio State has a relatively clear edge over #9 TCU.<\/span>4<\/a><\/p>\nNext up, the South, who will face the East winner in the Final Four.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n
We\u2019ve updated our projections with the results of tonight\u2019s First Four games in Dayton. But almost every office pool starts on Thursday, once the field is reduced to 64 teams, so you still have plenty of time to fill out your picks.<\/p>\n
We also added new injury data earlier tonight. There were no major changes, but we now have a <\/span>more pessimistic timeline<\/a> for any return of Duke\u2019s Caleb Foster. We also toned down the effect of injuries in an update last night.<\/span>1<\/a><\/p>\n We\u2019ve set up the spreadsheet to include an archive of all previous predictions so you can see the effect of these changes. We\u2019ll continue to update the projections as games are completed<\/span>.<\/strong><\/em> <\/span>-NS<\/strong>, 3\/18\/26<\/strong><\/em><\/p>\n Sure, it might seem like the world\u2019s gone a little crazy. But at least we\u2019ll be getting a dose of March Madness. The NCAA tournament is perhaps our very favorite event here at Silver Bulletin.<\/span>2<\/a> In fact, the tournament really needs no introduction. I\u2019ve been running versions of these projections since 2011, almost ten years before I\u2019d even heard of Substack.<\/span><\/p>\n But <\/span>pretty much every part of the model has changed at some point<\/a>. Instead of compiling other people\u2019s projections, we now mostly rely on our own in the form of our new <\/span>COOPER ratings<\/a> \u2014 although we blend them with <\/span>Ken Pomeroy\u2019s ratings<\/a> (because we think Pomeroy is pretty much the best, present company excluded.) We\u2019ve also upgraded our technology stack. Believe it or not, until last year, part of the work for our NCAA model was still being done in Microsoft Excel.<\/span>3<\/a> Now we\u2019ve built the code to run proper simulations \u2014 100,000 at a time \u2014 which enables more sophisticated handling of injuries (and there are a lot of them this year), among other things. This isn\u2019t an \u201cAI-driven\u201d model quite yet, though Claude and other AI tools are increasingly helping us smooth out some of the code’s rough patches and turn these numbers around more quickly.<\/span><\/p>\n Still, March Madness is eternal. If nothing else, there will be upsets: we\u2019ve calculated that the odds of having a perfect bracket are on the order of 1 in 10 quintillion. I guess I\u2019ll just have to concede that we\u2019re living in a simulation if it happens.<\/p>\n This is what we call a landing page, meaning that both the numbers and the text will change. We strongly recommend checking out the <\/span>web version with this link<\/a><\/strong>, which provides for better rendering of charts than the Substack app or email.<\/span><\/p>\n<\/li>\n We\u2019ll update these numbers once per day after tournament games are played. In the interest of underpromising and hopefully overdelivering, sometimes the update will need to wait until the morning, but we\u2019re hoping to get it out in the evening most of the time.<\/p>\n<\/li>\n The ratings give 5\/8ths of the weight to COOPER and 3\/8ths to Pomeroy. There are lots of other systems out there, but basically, that\u2019s the mix I\u2019d use if I were betting on the games myself.<\/p>\n<\/li>\n They also account for injuries, travel distance, and \u2014 once the tournament is underway \u2014 how teams have performed so far in the tourney relative to the model\u2019s expectations. (Early-round over- or underperformance is often fairly predictive of what happens later on.) For more details about how all of this works behind the scenes, see our <\/span>methodology page<\/a>.<\/span><\/p>\n<\/li>\n Women\u2019s projections are now ready also and can be found <\/span>here<\/a>.<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n Let\u2019s start with the overall leaders:<\/p>\n In the forecasts we issued last night, Arizona surprised us by being a slight overall favorite, but now that we\u2019ve toned down the effect of injury adjustments (see above), it\u2019s more of a three-way tie between the Wildcats, Duke and Michigan. We would argue that Arizona is a bit underrated. They are healthier than the other favorites, plus Arizona has a slight travel advantage, as teams have to trek across the country to play them in the West region, and a relatively easy draw. But our ratings do have Michigan and Duke as slightly better teams at full strength.<\/p>\n Overall, there\u2019s fairly strong alignment between who we think are the best teams and the most likely winners. A team\u2019s draw can matter, but it tends to matter less for the elite programs. By the time you get to the Final Four, there\u2019s usually no way around having to beat tough competition.<\/p>\n The rest of this page contains:<\/p>\n Region-by-region projections of each team\u2019s chances of advancing to each round, plus my first thoughts on each region. Analysis of the East region is free for everyone, while the rest is a bonus for paid subscribers.<\/p>\n<\/li>\n Odds for forthcoming games (win probabilities, point spreads, totals, etc.)<\/p>\n<\/li>\n A comparison of the ratings systems used in the projections and the impact of injuries.<\/p>\n<\/li>\n And a spreadsheet version of these projections. We\u2019re hoping to archive these so you\u2019ll be able to see how our odds have evolved throughout the tournament.<\/p>\n<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n Full disclosure: once the tournament gets underway, we\u2019ll cut back on some of the text you\u2019re seeing below to get you the updated numbers as quickly as possible.<\/p>\n Our tour begins in the East:<\/p>\n Duke is a great team \u2014 COOPER thinks they have a chance to rank among the all-time great teams if they win out, in fact. But the selection committee didn\u2019t really do them any favors. St. John\u2019s, which just won the Big East, is significantly under-seeded as a #5. Our models tend to like the Big East relative to consensus \u2014 a lot of UConn and Villanova championships over the years have endorsed that view \u2014 and would actually view the Johnnies as a candidate for a #3 seed or even a #2. Speaking of UConn, they\u2019re in the bottom half of this bracket, along with Michigan State. While there\u2019s not any factor in COOPER for past tournament success <\/span>per se<\/em>, I would note that its ratings carry over partly from year to year. So somewhere deep in its recesses is a lot of respect for what the Spartans and Huskies have accomplished over the years.<\/span><\/p>\n But while it\u2019s liable to produce some great Sweet Sixteen and Elite Eight games, we\u2019re disappointed to tell you that the East isn\u2019t the best candidate for early-round upsets. Even #8 Ohio State has a relatively clear edge over #9 TCU.<\/span>4<\/a><\/p>\n Next up, the South, who will face the East winner in the Final Four.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n\n
\n