Which Teams are Poised for March Success?

Photo by Markus Spiske on Unsplash 

March Madness is widely known as the least predictable postseason tournament in sports. The one-game nature of each matchup, combined with the inherent variability presented in 18–22-year-olds competing against each other, leads to shocking upsets and Cinderella runs nearly every year.

However, some indicators stand out as giving your team the best chance of success in March. We still have a long way to go before the NCAA Tournament, but stacking up teams now gives us an opportunity to dive into how they can hope to improve over the final half of their seasons to set themselves up to cut down the nets.

Using CSA’s Relevance-Based Prediction, we looked at this year’s crop of teams in stats such as shooting, rebounding, and talent and compared them to past teams and how they have fared in March (in terms of games won) to better understand which team profiles translate to postseason success. All predictions are based on games as of January 15, 2026, and team stats are normalized to the season in which they occurred to account for broader changes in efficiency over time.

What can we learn from past years?

The graphs above show the variable importance results for NCAA Tournaments from 2021-2025. The chart on the left focuses on the impact each variable has on prediction conviction, while the chart on the right shows each variable’s effect on predicted March Madness wins. The gray bars show the 20th to 80th percentile ranges of while the lines near the centers show the median value.

Talent and strength of schedule are the most important variables (in the aggregate) in terms of conviction, indicating that team pedigree plays a central role in RBP’s confidence. Strength of schedule is at the top of median contribution to prediction as well. Rebounding (on both sides of the ball) also ranks highly in both charts, which suggests that maximizing possessions becomes even more important in March, and that good regular season rebounding translates well in March.

Adjusted offense, adjusted defense, and talent have some of the widest ranges for both conviction and prediction. When neither of those 3 stand out, RBP responds more to other factors in a team’s profile. However, when any of these variables are important, they are very important.

The Top Tier

There is a clear group of four teams at the top of RBP’s predictions of March Madness winners, but they may not be the exact four you’re thinking of. The top two teams, like most computer rankings and bracket projections, are Arizona and Michigan. After those two, however, Duke and Illinois round out the top four.

RBP places significant weight on Duke’s overall talent level and favors Illinois due to its firepower. Arizona’s rebounding profile is one of its standout features, while Michigan’s EFG% on both sides of the ball stand out.

Even at the top, however, no profile is without risk. The shakiest part of Arizona’s profile is their lack of three-point attempts, as their three-point rate is one of the largest detractors for conviction. Interestingly, Michigan’s fast-paced tempo is their largest detractor for conviction, as teams that play fast have a wider range of outcomes in the NCAA tournament.

Duke’s biggest red flag, unexpectedly, is their free throw rate. Duke gets to the free throw line a lot, but historically, success in March is correlated with a lower-than-average reliance on free throws. For the Illini, the area to focus on for improvement is defensive turnovers. They rank 362nd nationally (out of 365) in forcing turnovers, and this is by far their largest detractor from conviction.

First-Year Turnarounds

In an era of quick program turnarounds, there are two historical powerhouses back in RBP’s top 25 after being non-factors on a national level for multiple years: Virginia and Villanova. They came into the season hoping for signs of progress and have arrived ahead of schedule. Virginia has crept into the top 15 of most computer ranking systems, and Villanova has emerged as a contender for the 2nd best team in the Big East.

Virginia’s biggest strengths are shot defense and offensive rebounding, where they rank 4th and 5th in the country, respectively. Their most relevant teams include two champions, but also two teams that lost in the first round, suggesting that the Cavaliers’ March fate might be more volatile than most.

Many of these teams, especially those with deep tournament runs, relied on dynamic point guard play. Cassius Winston was key for the Michigan State teams, Houston had both Marcus Sasser and Jamal Shead in their backcourts, and UConn’s Tristen Newton was the Final Four Most Outstanding Player. The guard rotation of Dallin Hall, Sam Lewis, Chance Mallory, and Malik Thomas will be key if Virginia wants to make a run in March.

While Villanova does not excel at any one facet of the game, they are above average in nearly every category considered. They shoot the ball well and maximize possessions with good offensive rebounding and limiting turnovers. Defensively, they are very good at limiting opponent free throws.

There are many recent Duke teams in the Wildcats’ most relevant teams, including their most recent championship team. However, their profile also includes three first-round exits, two of which were 10 seeds (Indiana and Florida). Villanova currently projects in the 5-10 seed range, and ending up on a higher seed line could be very important for their March fate since the teams with similar statistical profiles that ended up as lower seeds did not have nearly as much success.

Mid-Major Madness

After a down year in 2025 for mid-major postseason success, 2026 may give us a return of Cinderellas. These are exactly the types of teams that have historically turned brackets upside down. Two teams stand out above the rest of the non-power conference teams, Saint Louis and Utah State.

While the Atlantic 10 and Mountain West are better resourced than most other conferences in the “mid-major” grouping, those conferences combined for just two wins in the 2025 tournament. The two teams are dead even in RBP’s predictions, but Utah State has a higher conviction.

Saint Louis utilizes a very balanced attack, with six different players averaging over 10 points per game. Their biggest strength is their EFG% on both offense and defense, as they rank second in the country in both measures. Robbie Avila is their star player, a do-it-all big who combines efficient scoring with guard-like passing.

Utah State’s offensive attack relies heavily on guards MJ Collins and Mason Falslev, who average 20.1 and 16.2 points per game, respectively. Their offensive EFG% ranks eighth in the country, and they force turnovers defensively at the eighth highest rate in the country as well. Both teams have performed very well to date and are in position to earn at-large bids to the NCAA Tournament even if they falter in their conference tournaments.