Table explanation: The Spearman Correlation Coefficients (SCC) below relate to how well the top 15, 25 and 35 teams, in the final coaches' poll, match with the predictions for the models listed. The '0,1,2' column contains how many top 35 team rankings were only off by 0, 1, or 2 places, and this is followed by the average deviation between the actual ranking and the prediction. ("X" in the large table at the bottom represents the number of wins in the NIT tournament that a team earned.)

	SCC15	SCC25	SCC35	0,1,2	Average
ZP2	0.96964	0.97731	0.96537	8,10,7	1.9000
PR2	0.98036	0.97077	0.95655	8,10,5	2.2857
50T	0.98036	0.97538	0.96467	8,9,7	2.0286
LN2	0.95983	0.96231	0.95851	11,5,7	2.0571
ZPF	0.89107	0.94115	0.94128	7,9,5	2.5426
MCB	0.95357	0.88615	0.93480	9,8,6	2.4000
OCC	0.94464	0.97154	0.92700	11,7,6	2.3286

Commentary: The 2008 tournament was the first (and only) one where all #1 seeds reached the Final Four, and possibly that contributed to the fact that every one of the models matched the top 5 teams in the final poll exactly. All of the models also matched the top 15, 25 and 35 fairly well - across the board: the ZP2 model recorded its second highest SCC-35 value, and its fourth lowest average difference ever; the PR2 model recorded its 3rd best SCC-15 value; and the 50T model had its second lowest SCC-35 (and SCC-15) value. This was probably the best overall year for the MCB model: the average difference tied for its lowest (with 2017), the SCC-35 value was its second highest, this SCC-15 value was third best. MCB also had Ohio State (the NIT champion) pretty well pegged, with all but the LN2 and OCC models ranking them higher than their (tie for the) #35 ranking. OCC did fairly well, but was off by 13 for Texas A&M (#40, but polls said #27), and by 11 with regards to Kansas State (#41 when the final poll said #30). However, the OCC model matched the final rank for Indiana and BYU 'exactly', which was at least two positions better than the six other models; OCC predicted USC's final rank best as well - for these three teams that appeared in the 'lower tier' of the final poll. (CBI champ Tulsa did not receive much recognition by the seven models here, but they did only received one vote in this year's final poll.)

TeamName	Poll	Wins	ZP2	PR2	50T	LN2	ZPF	MCB	OCC
Kansas	1	6	1	1	1	1	1	1	1
Memphis	2	5	2	2	2	2	2	2	2
NorthCarolina	3	4	3	3	3	3	3	3	3
UCLA	4	4	4	4	4	4	4	4	4
Texas	5	3	5	5	5	5	5	5	5
Louisville	6	3	7	7	7	7	9	7	8
Tennessee	7	2	8	8	8	9	7	9	9
Xavier	8	3	6	6	6	6	8	6	7
Davidson	9	3	11	10	10	11	14	10	10
Wisconsin	10	2	9	9	9	8	6	8	6
Stanford	11	2	10	11	11	10	10	12	11
Georgetown	12	1	12	12	12	12	11	13	12
MichiganSt	13	2	15	14	14	15	15	14	14
Butler	14	1	14	15	15	14	13	17	16
WashingtonSt	15	2	16	16	16	16	17	15	15
Duke	16	1	13	13	13	13	12	11	13
WestVirginia	17	2	18	18	18	19	22	16	18
Pittsburgh	18	1	19	20	20	22	19	21	21
NotreDame	19	1	17	17	17	17	16	20	17
Purdue	20	1	22	22	22	21	18	24	20
Marquette	21	1	24	24	24	24	26	18	22
WKentucky	22	2	20	19	19	18	21	19	19
Drake	23	0	23	23	23	23	20	23	23
Villanova	24	2	21	21	21	20	23	26	25
Vanderbilt	25	0	26	29	27	25	24	39	28
Connecticut	26	0	25	25	25	26	25	32	29
TexasA&M	27	1	28	28	29	30	31	22	40
MississippiSt	28	1	30	31	31	28	29	30	26
Clemson	29	0	35	35	34	36	37	29	31
KansasSt	30	1	33	33	33	31	32	25	41
Gonzaga	31	0	38	38	37	38	39	31	34
Arkansas	32	1	29	30	30	29	30	34	27
Indiana	33	0	36	37	36	37	38	28	33
UNLV	34	1	27	27	28	27	27	27	24
OhioSt	35T	"5"	32	26	26	39	28	36	32
BYU	35T	0	41	41	40	40	40	37	35
MiamiFL	37	1	34	34	35	32	33	33	42
USC	38T	0	42	42	41	42	42	41	37
Tulsa	38T	CBI	110	110	113	101	101	83	93