It doesn’t come as much surprise that teams that consistently play the strongest schedules tend to perform well in the NCAA tournament. Facing tough opponents year after year is great preparation for the grind of March Madness.
But there is a limit to how tough you want your season to be, based on the data.
Here’s what we saw when we looked at the teams that finished in the top 5 SoS each year since 2010.
|Didn't make tournament||4||10.0%|
|Lost in first round||12||30.0%|
|Lost in second round||7||17.5%|
|Lost in Sweet 16||5||12.5%|
|Lost in Elite Eight||8||20.0%|
|Lost in Final Four||3||7.5%|
|Lost in championship game||1||2.5%|
Only four of the 40 teams made the Final Four, and just one (2014 Kentucky) made the championship game. And yes, without context, four of 40 teams making the Final Four is above average, but when you consider the expectations that come with a high strength of schedule, these teams are underperforming. What’s more, four teams didn’t even make the tournament.
In total, the majority of teams (57.5 percent) lost before reaching the Sweet 16. Not exactly a strong showing.
Compare these teams to teams with lower-ranked strength of schedules, and a theme becomes apparent:
|SoS rank||Final Fours||Championship games||Titles|
Yes, you want a tough schedule, but not the toughest in the country. Teams with a strength of schedule ranked 6-15 have won six of the past eight national championships.
And when you look at the toughest of the tough, teams with the No. 1 strength of schedule, the slope gets even steeper.
|Year||Team||SOS||Record||NCAAT seed||NCAAT result|
|2010||Georgetown||1||23-10||3||Lost in first round|
|2011||Georgetown||1||21-10||6||Lost in first round|
|2012||Michigan St.||1||26-7||1||Lost in Sweet 16|
|2013||Duke||1||27-5||2||Lost in Elite Eight|
|2014||Kansas||1||24-9||2||Lost in second round|
|2015||Kansas||1||26-8||2||Lost in second round|
|2016||Oregon||1||27-6||1||Lost in Elite Eight|
|2017||Vanderbilt||1||19-15||9||Lost in first round|
No team that finished the regular season with the hardest of strength of schedule in the past eight years has made it to the Final Four. Five of eight (62.5 percent) lost on the opening weekend.
So how should this affect how you fill out your bracket?
It’s easy to look at strength of schedule as a complex, telling factor in a team’s toughness, but don’t be tricked into thinking this one number can tell you everything you need to know. If recent history tells us anything, easier schedules don’t lend themselves to March Madness longevity, but the absolute toughest schedules always lead to early exits come tournament time.