NCAA Tournament Crystal Basketball
by Dan Hauptman and Michael Protos
February 3, 2006
Last week, senior writers Dan Hauptman and Michael Protos debuted Hoopville’s Crystal Basketball. Hauptman and Protos agreed with the powers that be at the top but varied greatly in seeding the middle squads.
One Crystal Basketball reader questioned the inclusion of Louisville and Syracuse, doubting the selection committee’s desire to field teams with losing conference records. After two more losses, the Cardinals are at 2-6 in the Big East and have a long road ahead. The Orange, on the other hand, are at 4-4 and sport a strong RPI with no bad losses, albeit a handful of close-calls.
As Hauptman emphasized, the nature of these predictions inherently changes with the fluidity of the teams. Right now Louisville and Syracuse are struggling, but they are still in the race for the NCAA Tournament, and their talent and coaching should help the Cardinals and Orange right the ship easier than schools that don’t have those key components.
Just look at West Virginia last season. The Mountaineers lost five straight games in January (sound familiar?) and barely made the Big East tournament, then advanced to the finals of that tournament in which they lost to Syracuse and eventually reached the Elite Eight of the NCAA Tournament. Who beat the suddenly-on-fire Mountaineers? Louisville.
Our predictions take into account more than just the last two weeks of a long season of college basketball. So without any further ado, here’s what this week’s Crystal Basketball reveals.
| Hauptman’s Hoops Horoscope | Protos’ Prognostications |
|---|---|
 Connecticut Duke Memphis Illinois |
Duke Connecticut Memphis Villanova |
 Texas Gonzaga Villanova Florida |
Illinois Texas Gonzaga Florida |
 Pittsburgh George Washington Michigan State West Virginia |
George Washington Michigan State Tennessee Pittsburgh |
 Iowa Tennessee NC State UCLA |
West Virginia LSU Ohio State UCLA |
 Northern Iowa Michigan Boston College Ohio State |
Georgetown Northern Iowa Iowa Oklahoma |
 LSU Wisconsin Georgetown North Carolina |
Michigan Indiana NC State Creighton |
 Oklahoma Washington Indiana Wisconsin-Milwaukee |
Wisconsin Bucknell Boston College North Carolina |
 Bucknell Arizona Wichita State Cincinnati |
Washington Marquette Kentucky Syracuse |
 Creighton Marquette Kentucky UAB |
Maryland Cincinnati Seton Hall Xavier |
 Syracuse Colorado Maryland Iowa State |
UAB Iowa State Kansas Colorado |
 Southern Illinois George Mason Utah State Miami |
Arizona Wichita State Air Force Vanderbilt |
 San Diego State Akron Kansas State Temple |
California UNC-Wilmington Wisconsin-Milwaukee Nevada |
 Air Force Xavier Western Kentucky Manhattan |
Akron Western Kentucky Manhattan Northwestern State |
 Murray State Davidson Penn Winthrop |
San Diego State Davidson Murray State Winthrop |
 Northern Arizona UC Irvine Northwestern State Albany |
Penn Northern Arizona Albany UC Irvine |
 Central Connecticut State Delaware State IUPUI Lipscomb Southern |
IUPUI Central Connecticut State Delaware State Lipscomb Southern |
 Last four in:Kansas State Temple Air Force Xavier |
Last four in: Wichita State Air Force Vanderbilt California |
| Last four out: Seton Hall Kansas UTEP Louisville |
Last four out: Arkansas Louisville Miami Southern Illinois |
| Conference Breakdown: Big East: 8 Big Ten: 7 ACC: 6 Big 12: 5 Missouri Valley: 4 SEC: 4 Atlantic 10: 3 Pac-10: 3 Conference USA: 2 Mountain West: 2 21 one-bid conferences |
Conference Breakdown: Big East: 9 Big Ten: 7 SEC: 5 ACC: 5 Big 12: 5 Pac-10: 4 Missouri Valley: 3 Atlantic 10: 2 Conference USA: 2 Mountain West: 2 21 one-bid conferences |
| Shooting Stars: UCLA Michigan North Carolina Oklahoma |
Shooting Stars: Creighton Kentucky Tennessee North Carolina |
| Sinking Ships: Washington Air Force Southern Illinois Syracuse |
Sinking Ships: Washington Wichita State Wisconsin Arizona |
Unlike last week, Hauptman and Protos no longer concur on the four No. 1 seeds. Hauptman foresees Illinois earning the final No. 1 spot instead of Villanova, which Protos likes ahead of the Illini. But the variations at the top remain fewer in comparison to the variations in the middle. Hauptman and Protos agree on 17 of the top 20 teams and 12 of those teams’ seeds.
Once again, chaos breaks out in seeds No. 6-9, in which Hauptman and Protos don’t see any of the same teams in their specific positions. Most of their differences are only by a seed or two. Like last week, Hauptman and Protos continue to differ on four teams in their fields after peering into the Crystal Basketball. This week, Hauptman predicts Southern Illinois, Miami, Kansas State and Temple – the latter two join Xavier and Air Force as his last four in the field. Protos agrees that Air Force is one of the last four in the field, but he prefers Seton Hall, Kansas, Vanderbilt and California. The Golden Bears and Commodores join Air Force and Wichita State as his last four in the tournament.
The Crystal Basketball was clear about a couple of teams on the rise. Hauptman and Protos lift Creighton, North Carolina and Marquette by two seeds this week. On the other hand, Washington, Arizona and Indiana are falling faster than the patented charge-drawing flop. The Huskies’ disastrous trip to Northern California cost Washington four seeds in Hauptman’s and Protos’ predictions.
As last week, the Big East and Big Ten continue to dominate the field. Hauptman gives one more tourney-bound team to the ACC and Missouri Valley than Protos does, while Protos favors the SEC and Pac-10 by one more team than Hauptman does.
And as for that thorny Louisville debate, the Cardinals find themselves among the last four out in both Crystal Basketball revelations.
Whose field looks more accurate to you? Or are both Protos and Hauptman off target? Send us e-mail to comment on the Crystal Basketball. Then check back each week to follow the evolution of Hauptman’s and Protos’ visions for the NCAA Tournament.
