Menu Close

CSN’s Bracketologist Updates Projections Of the 2013 NCAA Tournament Field

November 1, 2013 –  College Soccer New's Bracketologist issues his second projection of the 2013 NCAA Tournament field based on the latest RPI issued and a projection of the conference champions based on the the information currently available. These projections will be updated as the season progresses. Doctor Bracketology has projected the forty-eight teams that will be in the 2013 NCAA Tourney field, the sixteen seeds, and the match-ups.  His analysis is based on projected conference winners, geography, recent team play, and the head-to-head match-ups that have taken place to-date.

The Doctor advises that the RPI will change dramatically as the season progresses and there is a lot more soccer to be played before conference champions are determined.  The projections are not reflective of any national polls nor are they attempting to gaugue who the best teams are.  They are designed to predict what the NCAA Tournament field would be if the selections were to be made at this moment.*

#1 California Region

First Round – UC Irvine (Big West #3) vs. New Mexico (CUSA #2)

Second Round – Winner vs. #1 California (Pac-12 #2)

First Round – LaSalle (A-10 Automatic) vs. Charlotte (CUSA #4)

Second Round – Winner vs. #16 Wake Forest (ACC Automatic)

First Round – Missouri State (MVC Automatic) vs. Northwestern (Big Ten #3)

Second Round – Winner vs. #8 Notre Dame (ACC #2)

First Round – UIC (Horizon Automatic) vs. Wisconsin (Big Ten #4)

Second Round – Winner vs. #9 Marquette (Big East #2)

#2 UC Gerogetown Region

First Round – Monmouth (MAAC Automatic) vs. VCU (A-10 #2)

Second Round – Winner vs. #2  Georgetwon (Big East Automatic)

First Round – Xavier (Big East #4) vs. Akron (MAC Automatic)

Second Round – Winner vs. #15 Michigan State (Big Ten #2)

First Round – Loyola (CA) (WCC Automatic) vs. Stanford (Pac-12 #4)

Second Round – Winner vs. #7 UC Santa Barbara (Big West Automatic)

First Round – Navy (Patriot Automatic) vs. North Carolina (ACC #6)

Second Round – Winner vs. #10 William and Mary (CAA #2)

#3 Washington Region

First Round – Seattle (WAC Automatic) vs. Gonzaga (WCC #2)

Second Round – Winner vs. #3 Washington (Pac-12 Automatic)

First Round – Penn (Ivy Automatic) vs. Louisville (AAC Automatic) 

Second Round – Winner vs. #14 Virginia (ACC #4)

First Round – Drexel (CAA Automatic) vs. Old Dominion (CUSA Automatic)

Second Round – Winner vs. #6 UMBC (America East Automatic)

First Round – ETSU (A SUN Automatic) vs. UAB (CUSA #3) 

Second Round – Winner vs. #11 Coastal Carolina (Big South Automatic)

#4 Penn State Region

First Round – CCSU (NEC Automati) vs Connecticut (AAC #2)

Second Round – Winner vs. #4 Penn State (Big Ten Automatic)

First Round – Wofford (So Con Automatic) vs. Clemson (ACC #5)

Second Round – Winner vs. #13 Furman (So Con #2)

First Round – Denver (Summit Automatic) vs. Cal State Northridge (Big West #2)

Second Round – Winner vs. #5 UCLA (Pac12 #3)

First Round – Saint Louis (A 10 #3) vs. Creighton (Big East #3)

Second Round – Winner vs. #12 Maryland (ACC #3)

Conference Breakdown

America East 1
American Athletic 2
Atlantic Coast 6
Atlantic Sun 1
Atlantic 10 3
Big East 4
Big South 1
Big Ten 4
Big West 3
Colonial  2
Conference USA 4
Horizon 1
Ivy 1
Metro Atlantic 1
Mid American 1
Missouri Valley  1
Northeast 1
Pacific 12 4
Patriot 1
Southern 2
Summit 1
West Coast 2
Total  48

Last Four At Large Selections

  • UC Irvine
  • Saint Louis
  • Stanford 
  • Xavier

Last Four Out

  • Delaware 
  • Providence
  • Elon 
  • Michigan 

*Note – CSN's Bracketologist uses the followuing process:  The twenty-three automatic qualifiers are determined by selecting each school that is currently in first place in its conference.  In the event two teams are tied with identical conference records, the team that has the highest RPI is selected.

Seeds, home teams, and at-large selections in general are selected largely using the RPI ratings.  In an effort to be as consistent as possible with the criteria the tournament selection committee will utilize, consideration is also given to geographical location and cost containment strategies designed to keep first round matches within driving distance as well as second round match-ups against seeded teams.  

Posted in Articles

Related Posts

Share This Post