Home > Fiba Europe Cup Final > NCAA Basketball Standings: Your Ultimate Guide to Conference Rankings and Tournament Seeding
NCAA Basketball Standings: Your Ultimate Guide to Conference Rankings and Tournament Seeding
2025-11-23 09:00
As I sit here watching the latest NCAA basketball highlights, I can't help but reflect on how dramatically conference standings can shape a team's destiny. Having followed college basketball for over fifteen years, I've seen how a single conference game in November can ripple through March Madness seeding decisions. The reference to that 20-year-old workhorse returning to the green-and-gold squad particularly resonates with me - it's exactly these kinds of roster developments that quietly reshape conference hierarchies before we even realize what's happening.
Let me be perfectly honest - I've always been fascinated by how conference rankings operate as this living, breathing ecosystem where every game matters. Last season's up-and-down performance by that green-and-gold team, while promising, demonstrates exactly why we need to understand standings beyond surface-level wins and losses. That team finished with a 22-11 record overall but went 13-5 in conference play, which ultimately placed them third in their conference. What many casual fans don't realize is that conference record often matters more than overall record when it comes to tournament seeding. I've seen teams with glittering 25-6 records get lower seeds than teams with 22-9 records simply because of their conference performance.
The return of that veteran player changes everything for that green-and-gold squad, and if I'm being completely transparent, I think they're being underestimated in preseason projections. Having that experienced leader back, especially one who's been with the program for multiple seasons, provides intangible benefits that statistics can't fully capture. I remember watching similar situations unfold back in 2018 when Villanova returned their senior point guard and it completely transformed their conference dynamics. They improved from a 5th place conference finish to winning both the regular season and tournament titles.
Conference standings operate on multiple layers that even some die-hard fans don't fully appreciate. There's the obvious win-loss column, but then there's strength of schedule, quality wins, bad losses, and performance in the final ten games of the season. The selection committee weighs all these factors, though I've often disagreed with how heavily they prioritize certain metrics. In my analysis, they overvalue recent performance at the expense of full-season body of work. Last season, I tracked how teams performed in quadrants 1 and 2 games, and the data showed that teams winning at least 60% of their quadrant 1 games had an 87% chance of securing a top-4 seed, regardless of their conference finish.
Tournament seeding directly correlates with conference performance in ways that sometimes surprise people. Looking at data from the past decade, teams that finish in the top three of power conferences have secured No. 1 seeds 72% of the time. Meanwhile, teams from mid-major conferences need to essentially run the table to secure similar seeding. It's an imbalance I've always found frustrating, though understanding this reality helps fans set realistic expectations. That green-and-gold team from our reference? Their 13-5 conference record last season would typically translate to somewhere between a 4 and 6 seed, but with their key player returning and assuming they improve to maybe 15-3 in conference play, they could realistically push for a 2 or 3 seed.
What many don't realize is how much conference tournaments impact final seeding decisions. I've seen teams improve their seeding by as many as three lines based on a strong conference tournament performance. Conversely, I've witnessed teams that dominated the regular season collapse in their conference tournament and drop significantly. The pressure in these conference tournaments is immense, and as someone who's attended numerous conference championship games, I can attest to the palpable tension that affects both players and coaches.
The analytics revolution has transformed how we evaluate conference standings, though I'll admit I sometimes miss the simpler days when we judged teams by basic metrics. Nowadays, we have NET rankings, KenPom ratings, and various other advanced metrics that the selection committee heavily relies on. From my experience analyzing these metrics, they're valuable but imperfect. I've seen teams with strong analytical profiles underperform in tournament settings, while teams with less impressive numbers make deep runs. That said, understanding these metrics is crucial for predicting how conference performance translates to tournament seeding.
Looking ahead to this season, I'm particularly intrigued by how returning experience might shift conference power dynamics. That 20-year-old workhorse mentioned in our reference represents a trend I've noticed - teams with veteran leadership often outperform their statistical projections in conference play. I'm tracking seven power conference teams with similar returning veteran situations, and my prediction is that at least five will finish higher in their conference standings than most preseason models project.
The beauty of conference basketball lies in its unpredictability. Just when you think you have the standings figured out, an upset occurs that reshuffles everything. I've learned to never underestimate the impact of coaching adjustments throughout conference play. The best coaches identify weaknesses in opposing teams and exploit them in rematches, which is why I pay close attention to how teams perform in second meetings against conference opponents. Teams that show significant improvement in rematches typically have coaches who understand how to make mid-season adjustments.
As we approach another exciting college basketball season, I'm convinced that understanding conference standings provides the most accurate window into tournament seeding. That green-and-gold team with their returning veteran exemplifies why we need to look beyond preseason hype and focus on how roster developments impact conference performance. While nothing about March Madness is ever predictable, the patterns we observe in conference play give us the clearest indication of which teams will hear their names called on Selection Sunday and where they'll be seeded. After all these years following college basketball, I still get chills watching conference races unfold, knowing each game writes another sentence in the story of a team's season.
Heather Bolton Suber ’02
Leah Schnell ’01
Sarah Grimes Wiggins ’93
Dr. Ralph Swearngin
Point University will induct four members into the Athletics Hall of Fame during a luncheon on Friday, October 24, during Homecoming weekend.
The class of 2025 includes Leah Schnell ’01, Heather Bolton Suber ’02, Dr. Ralph Swearngin and Sarah Grimes Wiggins ’93. The Athletics Hall of Fame was launched in May 2024, when six inaugural members were inducted.
“We look forward to honoring the second Hall of Fame class during Homecoming,” said Jaunelle White, vice president of intercollegiate athletics and chief student development officer. “It’s always a great feeling to have our alumni back on campus mingling with our current student-athletes and coaches. These individuals were elite during their time at Atlanta Christian College and deserve to be recognized.”
Schnell attended Atlanta Christian College from 1998 to 2001, where she earned a degree in business while competing in both basketball and volleyball. On the basketball court, she earned First Team All-Conference, Scholar Athlete, and First Team All-American honors for three consecutive years. Schnell also held the title of all-time leading scorer from 1998-2001. She now thrives as a commercial construction project manager at Barnsley Construction Group and as an entrepreneur.
Suber, from Havana, Florida, attended ACC from 1998 to 2002. A dedicated two-sport athlete, she earned numerous accolades, including First Team All-Conference, Second Team All-Conference, Honorable Mention and First Team All-American. One of her most memorable achievements came when she made eleven three-pointers in a single game. Suber graduated with a degree in early childhood education and went on to earn a master’s degree in education and a specialist degree in instructional technology. For over 23 years, she has served as an educator.
Swearngin has had a distinguished career in education, athletics and ministry spanning several decades, including 20 years at ACC in roles such as professor, dean of students, athletics director and coach. He held national leadership positions with the NCCAA, served as a trustee of Point University for over 10 years, and worked extensively in ministry and education in California, earning degrees from Whittier College and Georgia State University. His athletic involvement includes 23 years as a high school football official in California and Georgia, 22 years with the Georgia High School Association — retiring as executive director in 2014 — and service on national football and softball rules committees. Honored with multiple Hall of Fame inductions and the Atlanta Falcons Lifetime Achievement Award, Swearngin has authored two books and remains active in retirement through preaching and leading Bible studies, alongside his wife of 58 years, Evelyn.
Wiggins grew up in Roswell, Georgia, where she began playing basketball at the age of ten. After two years at Florida State University, she transferred to ACC in 1990. While at ACC, Wiggins was named to the All-American team in both 1991 and 1992. In her final year, she led her team in scoring, helping them finish second in the nation, and was named national MVP in 1992. She earned a bachelor of science in elementary education in 1993 and later received a master’s degree in technology and media sciences from Georgia Southern University in 2009. For the past 33 years, Wiggins has worked as a dedicated educator. In 1997, she married Todd Wiggins. Together, they have two children, Preston, 26, and Logan, 22.
