NCAA Basketball Championship 2015: Who Best Fits the Blueprint of a Winner?

Most of the population is going to pick Kentucky to win the national championship. If you're a basketball fan, your eyes should tell you that's a logical pick. If you wait until March to tune in, every college basketball analyst who is being honest and not trying to be different is saying Kentucky is the clear favorite.

There's just one issue with trusting our eyes and perception. Observatory bias exists.

That's why every year I like to run the teams through a series of qualifications that I came up with by studying the champions dating back to 2003. This doesn't disqualify a team because I think it's lousy or maybe I caught it in person on a bad day.

I started this exercise three years ago, and 10 years of data seemed like a good pool to work with. Plus, at that point, that's how far kenpom.com's database dated back—he's since added the 2002 season.

What I've come to learn is that most champs resemble each other. Then last year happened. And there is no logical explanation for how the Connecticut Huskies won the national title.

The Huskies only passed five of the 10 qualifications, and they weren't even considered when I wrote last year's story because I start off by eliminating all seeds below four—since a sub-No. 4 seed hadn't won since 1988. 

So, last season goes in the shredder. As far as I'm concerned, it never happened. The Huskies were such an anomaly that including them as a champion just clouds up the data. 

Now, let's get to the 10 qualifications that I've adjusted slightly through the years based on rule changes and trends. And remember, every team below a No. 4 seed is not considered. 

1. Head coach has made it to an Elite Eight in the past. 
2. Has either won its regular-season conference title or conference tournament. (Every champ since 1990 except for Arizona in 1997 has won either one of the two or both until UConn last year, which, as you may recall, never happened.) 
3. Ranks in the top 20 in kenpom.com's adjusted offensive efficiency ratings. 
4. Ranks in the top 20 in kenpom.com's adjusted defensive efficiency ratings. 
5. Shoots better than 37 percent from beyond the arc. 
6. Has at least three double-digit scorers. (Allow rounding up decimals, so 9.5-plus qualifies.)
7. Has a frontcourt scorer who averages better than 12 points per game or will eventually get drafted in the first round of the NBA draft. 
8. Rebounds better than 37 percent of its misses on the offensive end. 
9. Holds opponents to less than 45 percent shooting inside the arc. 
10. Has a defensive free-throw rate better than 34 percent. (Free-throw rate is the number of free throws attempted divided by field-goal attempts.) Lesson: Don't foul!

Pedigree Tests

The coaches of this year's Top Four seeds are almost all qualified to win in March. As you can see, only Virginia's Tony Bennett, Gonzaga's Mark Few, Notre Dame's Mike Brey, Iowa State's Fred Hoiberg and Maryland's Mark Turgeon have failed to reached an Elite Eight, but all five men have reached a Sweet 16.

Every national champion coach in between Steve Fisher in 1989 with Michigan and Kevin Ollie last year had been to at least a Sweet 16 previously, and Tubby Smith was the only winning coach who had not been to at least an Elite Eight.

Only Smith, Jim Harrick (UCLA 1995) and Bill Self (Kansas 2008) had not been to a Final Four. Ollie, of course, had not even coached in an NCAA tournament before.

And the Huskies also failed to win their conference regular season or conference tourney, becoming the first team to win a title without one of those crowns since Arizona in 1997.

But since last year never happened, let's move on.

Using the conference success test, you'll see that Duke is the biggest favorite that would be eliminated from contention. If Mike Krzyzewski were to win the title, it would be the first time he had done so without an ACC regular-season championship or conference tourney title.

Coach K's 1991 title team was the only one of his four national champions to not win both the ACC regular season and postseason—that team lost to North Carolina (by 22!) in the ACC title game.

Offensive Footprint

The most important of these qualifications are the efficiency tests. Great teams are really good at scoring and really good at getting stops. 

Every champ in Ken Pomeroy's database dating back to 2002—sans last year's Huskies—has ranked in the top 18 in offensive efficiency. 

It's worth noting that those numbers account for the tournament as well, so some teams in our pool could crack the top 20 by the end of the tourney, but here's how they stack up right now: 

Virginia is the most notable team that fails the efficiency test, but it is worth considering that before second-leading scorer Justin Anderson fractured his finger, UVA was one of the most efficient offenses in college basketball. 

Look at Virginia's efficiency in the first 21 games before Anderson fractured his finger compared to the last 11 games since his injury, which include the game he got hurt and the two ACC tournament appearances in which he went scoreless. 

So with Anderson, the Cavaliers are one of the best offenses in the country. That non-adjusted 116.8 efficiency would currently rank sixth nationally. Without him, Virginia's non-adjusted efficiency would rank 178th, one spot below Santa Clara. 

This is why it's so hard to predict how far the Cavaliers will make it in the tourney. If Anderson can find his shooting stroke and get back to the guy he was earlier this year, they've got a great shot to make a run. If not, they're going to have to rely on their pack-line defense to carry them and hope no one gets hot against them. As good as that defense is, someone is going to get hot.  

The other common offensive ingredients among national champs have been three-point shooting, offensive rebounding, balance and a big man who can get buckets and/or is a pro. 

Eleven of the last 13 champs have passed the three-point test—Syracuse (2003) and Louisville (2013) were the exceptions. Ten of the 13 have had an offensive rebounding rate better than 37 percent—Maryland (2002), Florida (2006) and UConn (2014) did not, but both Maryland and Florida were close. 

It's interesting that both Wisconsin and Kentucky—the best two teams, in my opinion—don't pass the three-point test. The Badgers are considered a really good three-point shooting team, but their percentage doesn't reflect it. The Cats collectively aren't great from deep, but they do have a knockdown shooter in Devin Booker.

All of the last 13 champs pass the balance and big-man tests, and Georgetown is the only Top Four seed that fails both this season.

Since Georgetown, Oklahoma, Baylor, Villanova and Virginia don't meet the scoring requirements for bigs (12-plus PPG), I asked two *NBA scouts if any of those teams have a first-round big fella on their roster. One scout answered none, and the other said maybe Villanova's Daniel Ochefu and Virginia's Mike Tobey but said both were "big maybes," so for the purpose of this exercise, neither team passed the test. 

*I didn't waste my energy asking about Kentucky. It's obvious that Karl-Anthony Towns and Willie Cauley-Stein will both be first-round picks, and Dakari Johnson is a possibility as well.

Defensive Footprint

Once again, the efficiency test is the one that matters most. North Carolina in 2009 is the only one of the last 13 champs to finish outside the top 20, and the Heels were 21st in adjusted defensive efficiency.

Wisconsin and Duke are the two contenders whom you may want to hesitate picking due to their defensive ranks, although the Badgers are trending upward. 

Wisconsin's two-point defense and foul rate are also on the right side of the curve. 

The only champ of the last 13 that didn't pass the two-point percentage D test was Florida in 2007. The Gators were close at 46.3 percent. This is another reason to worry about the Blue Devils, as they've had trouble containing penetration, particularly with Jahlil Okafor working against ball screens, and that's why their number is higher than most. 

The last two champs bucked the foul-rate trend—the previous 11 all had a foul rate below 34 percent—but Louisville (34.9) was close despite playing an extremely aggressive defensive style. And you can basically throw out last season, as the rule changes bumped the national average up 4.6 percent from the previous year. 

Final Results

So according to these numbers, who should be the favorite to win the title? 

Shocker. The numbers like Kentucky as well. 

Before buying those 40-0 shirts, I will caution Big Blue Nation that two years ago, the numbers liked Indiana the most and that team lost in the Sweet 16. Louisville also passed most of the tests that year and was one of the top contenders based on the numbers.

Last year, you'll remember, has been stricken from the record.

If you want to go against the grain and pick against Kentucky, there are some good options out there. Gonzaga would have passed nine tests if the "coached in an Elite Eight" rule was changed to a Sweet 16. Kansas, despite what our eyes may tell us about Bill Self's up-and-down team, is a worthy contender on numbers alone.

And any team with at least a seven next to its name is likely in play. So Wisconsin, Villanova, Duke and Arizona would be solid picks.

But I'm going with my eyes and the numbers. History likes Kentucky, and it's hard to argue against that.

All advanced stats via kenpom.com.

C.J. Moore covers college basketball for Bleacher Report. You can follow him on Twitter @CJMooreBR.