Here are the # of teams IMO are alive for bids as of now:
America East-1
Atlantic 10-6
ACC-6
Atlantic Sun-2
Big 12-4
Big East-7
Big Sky-2
Southern-3
Big 10-5
Big West-1
CAA-1
C-USA-2
Great West-1
Horizon-2
Ivy-2
MAAC-2
MAC-3
MEAC-2
MVC-2
MWC-5
Northeast-1
OVC-3
Pac 12-7
Patriot-2
SEC-5
Southern-3
Southland-2
SWAC-2
Summit-3
Sun Belt-2
WCC-4
WAC-5
Obviously way more than 68, but these are the contenders.
The Big Ten has at least seven contenders for bids (Indiana, Michigan, Michigan State, Wisconsin, Ohio State, Minnesota, Illinois) and possibly eight (Iowa), depending on your definition of “contenders.” I think that it would take quite a lot for any of the first seven to miss the tourney, at this point.
My definition:
1)Winning conference record
2)20 wins OR single-digit loses
3)OR ahead of team with #2
I’m not sure that I understand what your are trying to accomplish, then.
Illinois and Minnesota are more likely to make the NCAA tournament than Harvard or Princeton (each of which has, in round numbers, a 50% shot), and Illinois and Minnesota also are more likely to win the NCAA tournament than either Harvard or Princeton.
bbonden-The NCAA tells us (i.e, lies) that they aren’t picking teams they think can win, merely who they deem deserving. My main complaint is that the 5 months leading up to conference tourney time is rendered moot for all but the BCS conferences.
Why don’t you pick a premise, set it up, define the terms, and ask a question, all in one convenient OP?