LISTEN: Norlander interviews the committee chair on CBS Sports HQ

Summary

Eye On College Basketball — Norlander Interviews Committee Chair Keith Gill (March 16, 2026)

Episode Overview

In this special episode of Eye On College Basketball, Matt Norlander conducts an in-depth interview with NCAA Men's Basketball Tournament Selection Committee chair Keith Gill. With the fresh release of this year’s tournament bracket, the conversation offers listeners a rare, transparent look at the committee’s decision-making process—including how specific teams landed their seeds, what metrics mattered most, and the unique situations influencing the final bracket. The episode is particularly valuable for fans eager to understand both headline decisions and the nitty-gritty of how the committee operates during "Selection Sunday."

---

Key Discussion Points and Insights

Miami’s Placement and the Seed Scrubbing Process

• [01:42 – 03:16]
  • Miami’s At-Large Selection: Miami was not the final at-large team chosen for the tournament, despite taking a spot in the "First Four" in Dayton. They initially ranked above NC State, Texas, and SMU.
    • Keith Gill: “They weren't the last team selected. They went in ahead of NC State, Texas and SMU. And then when we did our scrubbing, those schools scrubbed above them and that's why they're kind of in that last spot in the at large field.” (01:57)
  • Seed Scrubbing Explained: The committee reviews resumes for teams in similar positions, comparing predictive metrics and quality wins to reassess and confirm seeding order.
    • Keith Gill: “When we build our seed line, we go back through it...we look at those resumes to see if there are any reasons that we would want to change the order of that seating.” (02:35)
  • Why Miami Dropped: Miami’s strong record but weak predictive metrics contributed to their descent on the seed line after review.
    • Keith Gill: “Miami ended up kind of at the last at large on our seed list position, but they weren't the last at large teams selected into the field.” (03:16)

Committee’s Selection Philosophy

• [03:16 – 04:34]
  • Focus on Resume, Not Narrative: The committee avoids making selections based on feel-good stories (e.g., an undefeated regular season) and instead uses objective resume metrics.
    • Keith Gill: “We’re looking for the 37 best at larges...when you look at some of the other resume metrics, their strength of record was 28, their WAB was 37...the committee determined that they were going to be one of the 37 best at large teams.” (03:41)
  • Predictive Metrics as Tie-breaker: When teams are closely evaluated, predictive metrics are used to decide final ordering.

Timeline and Bubble Decisions

• [04:34 – 05:27]
  • When the Field was Finalized: The field was mostly set by Saturday night; Sunday's results led to minor adjustments and contingency brackets.
    • Keith Gill: “We knew by the end of Saturday night. We certainly had to put together some contingency brackets based on some of the results relative to some of the five games that happened today." (04:43)
  • High Loss Teams (e.g., Auburn) Miss Out: Teams with strong résumés but a high number of losses (like Auburn) were left out due to their loss volume and borderline win percentages.
    • Keith Gill: “When you look at that winning percentage, 515, the 16 losses...the committee took that all into consideration." (05:27)

Bubble Surprises, Wins Above Bubble (WAB), and Outliers

• [05:51 – 07:29]
  • NC State, Missouri, UCF: NC State landed in Dayton due to late-season losses, despite a solid overall year. Missouri and UCF were unexpectedly safer in placement, thanks to key quality wins.
    • Keith Gill: “[Missouri]...has some real quality wins there. Certainly the win against Florida is one of the better wins of the bubble team. When you look at NC State...some of those losses down the stretch made their resume...fall into that first four category." (06:16)
  • Role of WAB: The committee does not use WAB as a strict cutoff; it’s a reference point, not a determining factor.
    • Keith Gill: “We don’t actually do that kind of evaluation. Wins above bubble allows us to compare things that are very difficult to compare…but we don’t use it as a cut score.” (07:02)

Vanderbilt’s Five Seed and Bracket Impacts of Sunday’s Results

• [07:29 – 08:51]
  • Vanderbilt’s Surprising Seed: Despite not winning the SEC, Vanderbilt leapt to a 5-seed due to an abundance of quality wins, especially against top opponents late in the season.
    • Keith Gill: “They had some really good wins down the stretch in the SEC tournament...as we evaluated them and looked at some of the other teams that they were being compared against...that's how they ended up on the on the five line.” (08:16)
  • Impact of Sunday’s Outcomes: Tournament action, particularly Purdue’s win of the Big Ten, directly shifted seeding for the top lines and influenced placement for several teams.

Bracketing Protocols and Exceptions

• [08:51 – 09:55]
  • Avoiding Rematches, Honoring Protocols: Protocols, such as avoiding repeat matchups (e.g., Texas vs. NC State, who played each other earlier in Maui), influenced specific bracket pairings. Sometimes principles (like not having BYU play on Sunday) require specific accommodations.
    • Keith Gill: “The one place where we relax our bracketing principles is...Texas and NC State. They played earlier this year in Maui...there was no other alternative but for us to relax the bracket so that we make sure that we don't violate another principle relative to who those teams might play after that game.” (09:21)

---

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• On Miami’s Seeding:
  “Miami ended up kind of in that at the last at large on our seed list position, but they weren't the last at large teams selected into the field.”
  — Keith Gill (03:16)

• On the Selection Process:
  “We're looking for the 37 best at larges...a lot on the resume metrics...it was astral chance that another bubble team could perform in the same way with Miami with their, with their current schedule.”
  — Keith Gill (03:41)

• Regarding High-Loss Teams:
  “When you look at that winning percentage, 515, the 16 losses...the committee took that all into consideration, they thought they just hadn't done enough to make it inside the field.”
  — Keith Gill (05:27)

• Clarifying WAB’s Role:
  “Wins above bubble allows us to kind of compare things that are very difficult to compare…but we don't use it as a cut score.”
  — Keith Gill (07:02)

• On Adapting Bracketing Principles:
  “...there was no other alternative but for us to relax the bracket so that we make sure that we don't violate another principle relative to who those teams might play after that game.”
  — Keith Gill (09:21)

---

Timestamps for Key Segments

• 01:42 — Start of Norlander's interview with committee chair Keith Gill
• 01:57–03:16 — Discussion of Miami’s at-large case and the seed scrubbing process
• 03:16–04:34 — Committee’s selection criteria and predictive metrics
• 04:34–05:27 — Timing of the field finalization and the Auburn bubble decision
• 05:51–06:40 — Surprising placements for NC State, Missouri, and UCF
• 06:40–07:29 — The use—and limits—of Wins Above Bubble (WAB)
• 07:29–08:51 — Vanderbilt’s surprising seed and the effect of Sunday’s results
• 08:51–09:55 — Bracketing protocols and the necessity of exceptions in the draw

---

Takeaways

• Transparency on Seeding: Gill’s answers reveal the committee’s heavy reliance on objective metrics, balanced by discussions to ensure fairness—especially when teams have unusual résumés or present “outlier” cases.
• No Preset Thresholds: Metrics like WAB are tools, not strict guidelines, highlighting that evaluation is still nuanced and case-by-case.
• Procedural Integrity: The committee sometimes has no perfect solution and must prioritize one principle (e.g., avoiding Sunday play for BYU) over another (avoiding repeat matchups), showing the complexities involved.

---

This episode provides an unfiltered glimpse into how the field of 68 is created, blending data analytics with thorough committee debate. For fans and bracketologists alike, Keith Gill’s clarifications directly address perennial Selection Sunday questions, from why certain teams are in (or out) to how the seeds and sites are ultimately decided.

Transcript

[Robert Half Recruiter]

Finding a skilled hire takes more than just reviewing a resume as AI raises the bar on how experience is presented. Hiring managers need better ways to evaluate skills and fit. That's where Robert Half can help our recruiters combine their expertise with award winning AI to review what's behind every application. Quickly learn how we can find you specialized talent in finance, accounting, technology and more at Robert Half. We know talent. Visit roberthalf.com talent today so you've got

[Collars and Company Spokesperson]

a few shirts in your closet and you've had them for a while. But the collar situation, we know how it gets. It just doesn't have the right feel. It doesn't look good under the blazer. It gets tucked under. There's a bunch up situation. We hate the bunch up situation. So I got something for you. Check out Collars and company, the makers of the dress collar polo. The shirts are a four way stretch, buttery, soft polo. Okay, but then they've got a firm dress collar on them. So they give you the dress shirt look but have the extremely comfortable polo feel as well. You can wear these things to the office, you can wear them out to lunch or dinner, wear them on a date, you can wear them when you go play golf. You can wear it under a blazer, you can wear it underneath a sweater. It's good on its own. There's so many options with the dress collar polo. They have an array of sweaters, quarter zips, there's even pants and outerwear as well. So if you're looking for a performance dress shirt or polo that looks great all day, check out collars and co.com use promo code hoops for 15% off any purchase of $100 or more.

[CBS Sports Host]

Keith, thank you so much for joining us on CBS Sports hq. We've got a lot to dive into and not a lot of time to do it. Let's go right to it. Miami University in the field, but going to Dayton. But if I understand correctly, Miami University was not the last team selected as an at large, Is that correct?

[Keith Gill]

That is correct. So they weren't the last team selected. They went in ahead of NC State, Texas and smu. And then when we did our scrubbing, those schools scrubbed above them and that's why they're kind of in that last spot in the at large field.

[CBS Sports Host]

Alright, so everyone watching and digesting this in real time and the immediacy of the bracket coming out should know that Miami was actually the fourth team, the fourth to last team and actually had the best positioning initially of any team going to Dayton.

[Collars and Company Spokesperson]

Correct.

[Keith Gill]

That is Correct.

[CBS Sports Host]

And then can you quickly describe what the seed scrubbing process is? I know you guys have been doing it a lot over the past four or five days, but why did it wind up that Miami actually wound up getting scrubbed all the way down to where it was sitting there right on the edge?

[Keith Gill]

Yeah. So when we build our seed line, we go back through it once we have it built, and we essentially scrub. So we take each school's resumes that are next to each other and we compare them both with the school above them and the school below them. And. And we look at those resumes to see if there are any reasons that we would want to. That we would want to change the order of that seating. And when we went through that process and when we were looking at Miami's predictives and also, you know, kind of the quality win totals, it just allowed those schools to scrub up above them. And Miami. Miami ended up kind of in that at the last at large on our seedless position, but they weren't the last at large teams selected into the field.

[CBS Sports Host]

Would it be safe to say when we boil down the conversation that the committee, collectively, Even though there's 12 different opinions, looked at a team that went undefeated in the regular season and said, we need to have a team like this in our national tournament. And then once they were safely in and you really started to debate those teams, you said, but the predictives are so poor outside the top 60, outside the top 70, outside the top 80, that you got to a point where we know they're going to be in, but just from a team quality standpoint, we think they are the worst team among all the at largest.

[Keith Gill]

No, you know, that's not really the approach that we take. Right. You know, we're looking for the 37 best at largest. And when we are selecting teams in the field, we focus a lot on the resume metrics. And so when you look at Miami, it's very rare that any team's going to go undefeated. And certainly when we compared the bubble teams, it was astral chance that another bubble team could perform in the same way with Miami with their, with their current schedule. Also then when you look at some of the other resume metrics, their strength of record was 28, their wob was 37. And so when you take that kind of body of work, the committee determined that they were going to be. That they were one of the 37 best at large teams. I think the scrubbing process, we focus a lot of times on kind of the predictive metrics. And when you look at mime's predictives, they just weren't as good as those three teams that we just mentioned. And that's how that process played out.

[CBS Sports Host]

When did the final field of 68 get determined from an at large standpoint? Approximately what time was it earlier on Sunday or did you know by the end of Saturday night?

[Keith Gill]

We knew by the end of Saturday night. We certainly had to put together some contingency brackets based on some of the results relative to some of the five games that happened today. So. But we had a sense of who was going to be in the field and then we certainly were making changes today as we had results come in.

[CBS Sports Host]

Auburn had a really strong season in terms of its better wins, but it was, you know, had 16 losses. There's never been a team that had that many losses. One game over.500. Did the loss volume matter when it came to them not getting in? I know Oklahoma was the first team out of the field. This is my last question about the bubble specifically, Keith, but it seems that the projections for this bracket and committee behavior wound up actually bearing true. Just curious on how legitimately close those teams were or were not when it came down to it.

[Keith Gill]

Yeah, I thought they were very close. You know, those first four, the first four out was very close. You know, you mentioned Auburn. Obviously they had a really strong strength, strength of schedule. They had some really good wins. That win at Florida is a great win. But when you look at that winning percentage, 515, you know, the 16 losses, you know, when the committee took that all into consideration, they thought they just hadn't done enough to make it inside the field.

[CBS Sports Host]

Teams that are positioned a little bit of a surprise here. We can just go bing, bang, boom, lightning round if you want here. North Carolina State going to Dayton, I think will end as a surprise. Missouri and UCF maybe a little bit better position than people might have thought. So just real quick, Keith, on those particular teams, anything interesting from the discussions and why State wound up slipping all the way down into Dayton, whereas Missouri and ucf, two teams that were forecast to be potentially going to Dayton, wound up being more than safe.

[Keith Gill]

Yeah, you know, when you look at Missouri, they've got some real quality wins there. Certainly the win against Florida is one of the better wins of the bubble team. When you look at NC State, it's a full body of work and. And so certainly they've had some really good wins and a really good season, but some of those losses down the stretch kind of made their resume kind of get to a point where they fell into that first four category, wins above bubble.

[CBS Sports Host]

This is year two for that metric being used by the committee. I have a question for you. Hopefully you know it off the top of your head. Did every team that qualified as an at large get into this field? Did it have a better wins above bubble than Oklahoma, Auburn, San Diego State, New Mexico, Go on down the line. Was there a. When it got down to it and all the votes were in, was there a clear line of delineation between best WAB and worse?

[Keith Gill]

Yeah, you know, so we don't actually do that kind of evaluation. So at the end of the day, you know, wins above bubble allows us to kind of compare things that are very difficult to compare. So we certainly use it in a way that is very helpful for us in the evaluation process. But we don't use it as a cut score. So it's not something that we check to say, hey, you've got to have a wins above bubble, X, Y or Z. It really is something we use on an individual and a case by case basis to kind of compare resumes.

[CBS Sports Host]

I got another team I got to ask you about. I think the most surprising team that lent that no one or almost no one was expecting was Vanderbilt. Now we saw clear evidence of where Sunday's tournament action did have a direct influence on the bracket. I think it's fair to say that Purdue winning the Big Ten championship was able to vault them to the two line, perhaps flip Arizona and Michigan as well. Vanderbilt as a 5 is a little bit of a surprise here. It didn't win the SEC championship. That was Arkansas. But nonetheless it got there. And if I'm looking here correctly, Keith, I'm seeing Vandy right now with 17 combined quad one and quad two wins. That's more than St. Johns. That's more than Arkansas. That's more than Kansas, more than Nebraska, more than Michigan State, which has only 14 of them. What was the discussion and justification behind putting the doors on the five line when some thought they actually might be able to sneak in on the back end and be the last three?

[Keith Gill]

Yeah, you know, we had a lot of conversation about Vanderbilt and certainly they had some really good wins down the stretch in the SEC tournament. Looking at, you know, their win against Tennessee, their win against Florida, they've had a really good season. And so as we evaluated them and looked at some of the other teams that they were being compared against, some of those other teams had some quality wins in that regard. And so that's where they, that's how they ended up on the on the five line. But they really did have a great season. They really are a great team and I think the committee certainly took that into consideration as they were evaluating them.

[CBS Sports Host]

Listen, we're not expecting to be 100% perfect. We're here a year ago Michigan was the five after winning the Big Ten tournament. Feels like that might just be the seed that might be a little bit vulnerable to some, some controversy. Last thing, let's get into the weeds a little bit so our viewers understand a little bit more though with the bracketing protocols. Teams that wind up in the overall seed list. Are there any teams that are either going to a certain site for the first weekend or on a certain seed line that actually had to be moved specifically because of bracketing principles, not including of course, BYU which can't play on a Sunday. So we already knew it would have to be a Thursday Saturday site.

[Keith Gill]

The one place where we relax our bracketing principles is when you look at that first four game between Texas and NC State. They played earlier this year in Maui and we would do everything that we can to try to avoid having a repeat matchup in kind of an opening round game like that. But with the way the ACC and the SEC have populated the bracket, whether it's in the first four or in that six seed line, there was no other alternative but for us to relax the bracket so that we make sure that we don't violate another principle relative to who those teams might play after that game.

[CBS Sports Host]

The chair of this year's committee, Keith Gill. I appreciate it. You get to finally show the world all that work you guys have been doing over the past five days. Thank you so much for joining us on CBS Sports hq.

[Progressive Insurance Announcer]

Paramount Podcasts this episode is brought to you by Progressive. Most of you aren't just listening right now. You're driving, cleaning and even exercising. But what if you could be saving money by switching to Progressive? Drivers who save by switching save nearly $750 on average and auto customers qualify for an average of 7 discounts multitask right now quote [e-mail] progressive casualty insurance company and affiliates national average 12 month savings of $744 by new customers surveyed who saved with Progressive between June 2022 and May 2023. Potential savings will vary. Discounts not available in all states and situations.