Vitrue SMI Rank of NCAA Tournament (seed)
- UCLA Bruins (6)
- Boston College Eagles (7)
- UNC Tar Heels (1)
- UConn Huskies (1)
- Kansas Jayhawks (3)
- Texas Longhorns (7)
- Cornell Big Red (14)
- Missouri Tigers (3)
- Michigan State Spartans (2)
- Washington Huskies (4)
- Tennessee Volunteers (9)
- Dayton Flyers (11)
- Syracuse Orange (3)
- USC Trojans (10)
- Memphis Tigers (2)
- Michigan Wolverines (10)
- Arizona Wildcats (12)
- Mississippi State Bulldogs (13)
- Maryland Terrapins(10)
- ASU Sun Devils (6)
- Utah Utes (5)
- Clemson Tigers (7)
- Duke Blue Devils (2)
- Wisconsin Badgers (12)
- Ohio State Buckeyes (8)
- Oklahoma Sooners (2)
- Illinois Fighting Illini (5)
- LSU Tigers (8)
- Louisville Cardinals (1)
- West Virginia Mountaineers (6)
- Texas A&M Aggies (9)
- Siena Saints (9)
- Purdue Boilermakers (5)
- BYU Cougars (8)
- Pittsburgh Panthers (1)
- FSU Seminoles (5)
- Oklahoma State Cowboys (8)
- Butler Bulldogs (9)
- California Golden Bears (7)
- North Dakota State Bison (14)
- Gonzaga Bulldogs (4)
- Minnesota Golden Gophers (10)
- Marquette Golden Eagles (6)
- Xavier Musketeers (4)
- Wake Forest Demon Deacons (4)
- Villanova Wildcats (3)
- Temple Owls (11)
- Utah State Aggies (11)
- Radford Highlanders (16)
- Northern Iowa Panthers (12)
- Akron Zips (13)
- Western Kentucky Hilltoppers (12)
- Chattanooga Mocs (16)
- Cleveland State Vikings (13)
- Binghamton Bearcats (15)
- East Tennessee State Buccaneers (16)
- Portland State Vikings (13)
- Cal State Northridge Matadors (15)
- American University Eagles (14)
- Morehead State Eagles (16)
- Robert Morris Colonials (15)
- Virginia Commonwealth Rams (11)
- Stephen F. Austin Lumberjacks (14)
- Morgan State Bears (16)
Great weekend ahead for college basketball. As most who craft their bracket carefully, I need to get my picks in by Thursday before tip off for our friendly office pool (which does get a bit heated I must admit). I have heard of many ways to create the best bracket from going with the tried and true favorites, to rankings to sheer gut but what about the fan momentum? Can the most vocal fans prod their teams to pound the hardwoods and deliver wins?
We looked at online social buzz scores for the 64 teams leading into the height of this weekend’s March Madness – who will emerge as the Sweet 16 vying for the coveted NCAA Championship title and what does voice on the social web have to say about it anyway?
Using the Vitrue Social Media Index (SMI) we reviewed all 64 teams in contention and wanted to provide some key findings. We measured social chatter across popular social networks like Facebook and MySpace, video and photo sharing sites, micro-blogs like Twitter and blogs (more on our methodology).
Can the teams that rank with the highest social share of voice tell us anything as we head into this divisive weekend? Personally I am going to make my picks for Round 1 and 2 this weekend and honor the most social teams and see how I fare in the office pool. Last year I picked all number one seeds and came in second. So instead of using the top picks, I’m going with a contrarian approach using of fan enthusiasm as my guide. I will continue using the social chatter through the Vitrue SMI as my guide as we close in on the next round. Check back next week and see how the voice of the fans will influence the outcome.

Most Social Team Selects Using Vitrue SMI Round ! and 2 NCAA 2009
Looking at the Vitrue SMI rankings versus the seed rankings there are some interesting findings:
- The #2 social team is Boston College who was a bubble team that made the tournament at a #7 seed
- Also interesting is the #7 social team, Cornell, who won the Ivy league regular season and are a #14 seed
- The most social team is UCLA and is a #6 seed
- Not too surprising are two #1 seeds in UNC (#3 most social) and UConn (#4 most social) who are favored by many to win the entire tournament
Social Share of Voice for #1 and #2 seeds
Not surprisingly, UNC is leading the way with 28% of the social share of voice and UConn close behind with 23%. Interestingly all four #2 seeds in Michigan State, Memphis, Duke and Oklahoma beat out the remaining #1 seeds of Louisville and Pittsburgh.
This just may be the return of the upset year instead of last year where all four #1 seeds made the Final Four.

Social Share of Voice for 1 and 2 Seed NCAA teams
There are many ways to slice the data but one this is clear – fans are vocal on the social web.
Looking at the top-four teams, as well as a few others, some have a rich and vibrant basketball tradition and we could assume their fans follow passionately, regardless. We should weigh big alumni associations/followings as well as sheer population and some teams are just “hot” coming off the conference tourneys.
It is an interesting snap shot to see if the most social teams will translate into the winners coming out of this weekend. I will be cheering for the Dayton Flyers where my two uncles went to school. They are a Number 11 seed and should make them in the 40ish overall rank (as there are four 11 seeds) yet they are 12th overall as the most social team. Does this suggest they will be a dragon slayer and make it deep into the tournament, perhaps Sweet 16 or 8? Or will tiny Cornell matter? Or can Boston College somehow continue Boston’s crown as “title town”? Wish the games were on today!
We recently launched an application for Papa John’s and the Final Four. We see the use of the application as great testimony that passion in college sports is as big as ever, and no bigger than the big dance, the greatest sporting event in America. We see people taking tremendous social actions in support of their teams. Providing strategy and technology, we enabled Papa John’s reach their fans on Facebook with a simple way to enter a sweepstakes to win a trip the Final Four – as of this morning, their leaderboard has the top four listed as North Carolina, Louisville, Duke and Syracuse.
Who are you cheering for? Sound off and let us know.
Methodology for snap shot of NCAA teams
Each day, Vitrue analyzes the online conversations on a variety of social networking, blogging, microblogging, photo and video sharing sites.
The Vitrue SMI calculates scores about the brand’s social conversations. We apply a series of algorithms to reflect the frequency of usage, the size of the social media environment, and the magnitude of the conversation. The result is a single numeric score for each brand: the Vitrue Social Media Index (SMI).
The changing world of online conversations results in significant movements up and down for brands. We determined by averaging the SMI scores for each team as of March 15th, 2009. The result is a ranked list of the brands which are most talked about on the social web.
Because people often do not use a product’s full name in online conversations, we adapt our results to reflect common language usage. This dynamic process continues to evolve along with brands and language itself, with the goal of having the Vitrue SMI reflect the way people actually speak and type about brands.
Vitrue’s SMI reflects a combination of patent-pending technology, proprietary methodologies, and continuous refinement based on daily feedback and calibration. It provides the marketer with the industry’s simplest, most direct snapshot of conversations on the social web.