Welcome to Bubble Watch 2020!
Bracketology provides fans provide insight into how the committee sees teams and what the tournament would look like if the season ended that day. But there’s a lot that goes into it, and from only seeing the finished bracket, you don’t get the full picture.
That’s why we’re releasing a bubble watch where our bracketologist (me) breaks down where teams stand from the cutline and what they can do to remain or work themselves into the field of 68.
There are five categories: locks, should be in, over the bubble, on the bubble and bubble bursting.
Locks are teams that could lose the rest of their games and still get an at-large bid. It’s a tricky thing to lock a team up, and so it isn’t done lightly. Just because a team is unlocked doesn’t mean it won’t be in the tournament. It only means there are enough potential losses left that the resume could fall apart and risk being left out.
Should be in teams aren’t quite locks, but they’re looking pretty solid. If Selection Sunday was tomorrow, they would be absolute locks, and there’s a slim chance they play themselves out of the field. But the possibility remains, and so they stay unlocked.
Over the bubble squads are exactly that. They wouldn’t be worried about being excluded if the season ended now, but the resume isn’t strong enough that a few mistakes wouldn’t drop them down onto the bubble.
Those on the bubble are either barely in or barely out. They are receiving significant enough consideration for at-large positions, but in no way could they feel safe if the tournament selection occurred now. Finally, bubble bursting teams have enough of a foundation laid that if they collected some quality wins, they could play themselves onto the bubble, but at the time aren’t receiving significant consideration for an at-large bid.
You can see all the resumes for yourself here and find our previous bubble watch here.
With that out of the way, let’s look at the state of the bubble as of Tuesday afternoon on Feb. 25, 2020:
LOCKS
Dayton (A-10): 25-2, NET: 4, SOS: 25, vs. Q1: 4-2
Louisville (ACC): 23-6, NET: 11, SOS: 27, vs. Q1: 4-5
Florida State (ACC): 24-4, NET: 8, SOS: 33, vs. Q1: 5-3
Duke (ACC): 23-4, NET: 6, SOS: 24, vs. Q1: 4-3
Baylor (Big 12): 24-2, NET: 2, SOS: 68, vs. Q1: 10-1
Kansas (Big 12): 24-3, NET: 1, SOS: 1, vs. Q1: 11-3
West Virginia (Big 12): 19-9, NET: 17, SOS: 2, vs. Q1: 5-7
Seton Hall (Big East): 20-7, NET: 16, SOS: 19, vs. Q1: 10-5
Butler (Big East): 19-9, NET: 23, SOS: 41, vs. Q1: 8-7
Villanova (Big East): 21-6, NET: 12, SOS: 4, vs. Q1: 8-6
Creighton (Big East): 21-6, NET: 9, SOS: 16, vs. Q1: 9-6
Maryland (Big Ten): 22-5, NET: 10, SOS: 39, vs. Q1: 6-5
Penn State (Big Ten): 20-7, NET: 25, SOS: 112, vs. Q1: 7-5
Michigan State (Big Ten): 18-9, NET: 13, SOS: 56, vs. Q1: 5-8
Iowa (Big Ten): 19-8, NET: 27, SOS: 90, vs. Q1: 7-6
Ohio State (Big Ten): 18-9, NET: 19, SOS: 40, vs. Q1: 5-8
Michigan (Big Ten): 18-9, NET: 22, SOS: 65, vs. Q1: 7-8
San Diego State (MWC): 25-1, NET: 5, SOS: 106, vs. Q1: 4-0
Oregon (Pac-12): 21-7, NET: 20, SOS: 3, vs. Q1: 7-5
Colorado (Pac-12): 21-7, NET: 18, SOS: 6, vs. Q1: 6-3
Auburn (SEC): 23-4, NET: 28, SOS: 43, vs. Q1: 5-2
Kentucky (SEC): 22-5, NET: 21, SOS: 89, vs. Q1: 6-3
Gonzaga (WCC): 27-2, NET: 3, SOS: 132, vs. Q1: 5-2
BYU (WCC): 22-7, NET: 14, SOS: 30, vs. Q1: 3-4
SHOULD BE IN
Houston (AAC): 21-7, NET: 24, SOS: 82, vs. Q1: 2-4
Houston is tied for first in the AAC and inching closer to lock status. Even with the one-point loss at Memphis over the weekend, the Cougars added a win against Tulsa to their resume earlier in the week, and that, along with a lot of other teams around them losing, moved the team up a category. Houston’s remaining regular season games are Cincinnati (54), Memphis (61) and at UConn (71), and each are opportunities to impress the committee. A 2-1 record would probably lock this team up for an at-large bid, and even a 1-2 mark could do it.
Wisconsin (Big Ten): 17-10, NET: 30, SOS: 28, vs. Q1: 7-8
In the midst of a four-game winning streak that includes victories over Ohio State, Purdue and Rutgers, Wisconsin is getting closer to lockdom with each passing triumph. The Badgers now have seven Q1 wins, which is more than enough to feel comfortable for an at-large bid, and there’s nothing here to make me think they shouldn’t be in the dance. A win at Michigan in its next game would probably make it definite, but Wisconsin doesn’t need it to get in. Unless the Badgers totally implode, they should be fine.
Marquette (Big East): 17-9, NET: 26, SOS: 7, vs. Q1: 5-8
The good news: Marquette’s computer numbers are pretty good, with a top-10 SOS and top-30 NET, and the Golden Eagles haven’t lost to a team outside of the NET top 50. The bad news: a three-game skid has losses piling up, and Marquette is dropping in the S-curve as a result. This team probably isn’t in serious jeopardy of missing the Big Dance, but I can’t lock it up while this losing streak continues. The reality is, this resume could crumble if the Ls keep adding up, so this is where Marquette shall stay until it wins at least one more game, unless the rest of the country implodes equally as much.
Arizona (Pac-12): NET: 7, SOS: 5, vs. Q1: 3-6
The committee is not going to leave out a top-10 NET team. Arizona does not really need to worry about missing March Madness. The thing is, though, a 3-6 record against Q1 competition and a shortage of high-end wins is exactly what the committee hates to see. But the Wildcats aren’t far from lock status with their computer numbers and overall pretty positive resume. There aren’t any more regular season opportunities for marquee Ws, but winning at USC and at UCLA in Arizona’s next two games would do a lot toward locking it up.
OVER THE BUBBLE
Virginia (ACC): 19-7, NET: 51, SOS: 87, vs. Q1: 3-3
At a certain point, the Cavaliers looked like they could miss the NCAA Tournament a year after winning it. But a current four-game winning streak has Virginia off the bubble and definitely in the field of 68, at least for the time being. These victories haven’t been needle-movers, but they’re better than the alternative, which many of UVA’s fellow bubble brethren have chosen lately. The computer numbers on this resume aren’t the best, but an elite-level win against Florida State (8) and a 9-6 combined record in Q1 and Q2 games means Virginia is in good shape presently. A win at Virginia Tech on Wednesday would add another Q2 victory to the list and inch the Cavs further from the bubble.
Texas Tech (Big 12): 18-9, NET: 15, SOS: 92, vs. Q1: 3-8
Texas Tech has rattled off two-straight after falling at Oklahoma State (69) on Feb. 15, and it has helped stabilize the resume a bit. A great NET and wins over Louisville (11) and West Virginia (17) are the best things about this resume and why the Red Raiders aren’t on the bubble. That’s about all there is to be excited about, though. Tech has an interesting final four games of the regular season: at Oklahoma, Texas, at Baylor and Kansas. If it drops the Oklahoma and Texas games, then Tech could be a position to need to beat one of the Big 12’s top two dogs for an at-large bid. But if the Red Raiders clean up the Sooners and Longhorns, a W against the Bears and Jayhawks won’t be as necessary, if at all.
Rutgers (Big Ten): 17-10, NET: 34, SOS: 51, vs. Q1: 3-8
Rutgers is 2-5 in February, and it is beginning to drop it closer to the bubble. The Scarlet Knights are still far enough from the cutline to not be considered a bubble team right now, though, as okay computer numbers and seven Q1 and Q2 wins – including against Seton Hall (16), Penn State (25), Wisconsin (30) and Illinois (35) – do the job for the time being. But a 1-7 road record is very scary, and in some ways it makes the team’s final road games, at Penn State (Feb. 26) and at Purdue (March 7) must wins. The Scarlet Knights also welcome Maryland (10) to the RAC, and even though it’s at home, it would be the team’s best win and do wonders for getting them into the tournament. Rutgers is okay as of today, but these losses need to stop soon.
Illinois (Big Ten): 17-9, NET: 35, SOS: 72, vs. Q1: 5-7
After a four-game skid, Illinois has responded with two wins in a row: at Penn State and Nebraska. Beating the Cornhuskers doesn’t do much positive, but avoiding a negative is always good, and the Penn State win brings the Illini to 8-8 versus Q1 and Q2 competition. Illinois now has won four games on the road against NET top 40 teams, something the committee will salivate over. The team’s next game is at Northwestern, and a loss to the rival Wildcats would undo a lot of the good Illinois has done lately. Adding a third win to its current streak, though, would keep the cushion between it and cutline comfortable.
Arizona State (Pac-12): 19-8, NET: 41, SOS: 14, vs. Q1: 5-6
Make it seven wins in a row and a still-undefeated February for Arizona State. The Sun Devils defeated Oregon State (68) at home, 74-73, over the weekend, to follow up a 77-72 home victory against Oregon (20) two days earlier. ASU is now alone atop the Pac-12 standings, and it is off the bubble with a 5-6 Q1 record and 9-8 combined Q1 and Q2 mark. The team’s next test is at red-hot UCLA (76), which has burst onto the scene as a legitimate contender for the Pac-12 regular season title. With a victory in that one, plus a win at USC (47) in the next game, Arizona State might be locked up for a bid before the end of the month.
LSU (SEC): 19-8, NET: 29, SOS: 8, vs. Q1: 4-6
The Tigers have had a pretty miserable February, but they hope an 86-80 win at South Carolina (63) on Saturday will be the start of a better future. We will learn a lot about where LSU stands in its next game, a date with Florida (33) in Gainesville. A win would secure a positive road record for the season, an important issue to the committee, and would give LSU five Q1 wins. A loss would make the team 2-5 since losing to Vanderbilt on Feb. 5 and throw away its best opportunity to impress the committee before the SEC Tournament.
St. Mary’s (WCC): 22-6, NET: 32, SOS: 81, vs. Q1: 3-3
The Gaels have been chugging along since losing to Gonzaga earlier in the month with three wins in three games against three teams it should beat. After a date at Santa Clara on Thursday, St. Mary’s will meet Gonzaga in Spokane in its final regular season game. A win in that one would lock up the Gaels, and probably secure them a pretty nice seed, too. A loss probably wouldn’t keep this team out, although a loss to the Broncos and a flame out in the WCC Tournament might make Moraga nervous. But if SMC takes care of business against opponents it should, that will probably be enough for an at-large bid, with or without a victory over the hated Zags.
ON THE BUBBLE
Cincinnati (AAC): 18-9, NET: 54, SOS: 12, vs. Q1: 2-5
It has been an up-and-down week for Cincinnati that has left it largely in the same place it was to start: right on the cutline. First, the Bearcats lost at home in overtime to UCF (127), a fourth Q3 loss that they really didn’t need. But then, they responded with a 67-64 home win against Wichita State (44) to complete the regular season sweep of the Shockers, an important Q2 W that they did really did need. In the end, nothing much changed for UC. It still needs at least one, maybe two more Q1 wins to feel totally safe on Selection Sunday (assuming no more Q3 hiccups occur) and has one more shot at one in the regular season: at Houston (24) on Sunday. I’m not sure I’m ready to call it a must-win game for Cincinnati, but it’s about as close as it gets otherwise.
Memphis (AAC): 19-8, NET: 61, SOS: 84, vs. Q1: 2-4
Memphis has been a mess for a good chunk of the season, but when it absolutely needed a win, it got it. The Tigers defeated Houston at home, 60-59, on Saturday, finally giving this resume a win to hang its hat on. That makes a huge difference and brings Memphis back into legitimate bubble discussion. Although the Tigers probably wouldn’t have enough to be included in the field if the season ended today, they’re back in the mix and with more chances to get on the right side of the cutline before the AAC Tournament. Dates at Houston and home against Wichita State loom large in the final days of the regular season.
Wichita State (AAC): 20-7, NET: 44, SOS: 86, vs. Q1: 2-4
With an 8-5 record in Q1 and Q2 games, you’d think Wichita State’s greatest accomplishment this season would be more than almost single-handedly keeping Cincinnati’s bubble hopes alive, yet here we are. The Shockers have two Q1 wins, but they’re at Oklahoma State (69) and at Connecticut (71), two teams that won’t be dancing, and they happened months ago. Wichita State has zero marquee wins, and with no more opportunities for one in the regular season, that’s a real problem. It squandered a chance at Cincinnati (54) on Sunday, the two time this month it allowed the Bearcats to notch out their showdown by a slim margin. While the Shockers are probably still in at the moment, the future doesn’t look very bright from where I’m looking. Wichita cannot afford to lose again in the regular season with the games it has remaining, and it would be wise to go on a little run in the AAC Tournament in hopes of finding that marquee win it so desperately needs.
Richmond (A-10): 20-7, NET: 49, SOS: 78, vs. Q1: 2-4
This resume is the vanilla ice cream of the bubble world. Nothing all that great, nothing all that terrible. Very meh. But sometimes, meh is good enough to get in. Right now, it’s enough to be right on the cutline. The Spiders could have done themselves a favor by picking up a relatively easy Q2 win at St. Bonaventure (113), but instead they lost, 75-71, on Saturday. Now, Richmond has one Q2 game (at Duquesne, 95) and three Q3 matchups left, which means plenty of opportunities to ruin this resume. With that in mind, the Spiders really need to take care of business against teams it should beat from here on out to feel remotely good about its chances on Selection Sunday.
Rhode Island (A-10): 19-7, NET: 37, SOS: 57, vs. Q1: 1-4
A solid NET, good collection of Q2 wins and positive road record (6-5) are what have URI on the right side of the bubble right now. But things can change quickly, and a 77-75 overtime loss at Davidson (77) on Saturday helped bring Rhody further down closer to the cutline. A loss at Fordham (277) in the team’s next game would be catastrophic for this resume, and the Rams would be wise to avoid it. However, the big date to circle that will likely answer if this is an NCAA Tournament team or not is March 4, the date Dayton (4) come to town. If you want to prove to the committee that you deserve an at-large from a non-power conference, then beating the best team in your league is the best way to do it. URI failed on the road in its first attempt. Now at home it should have a better chance, and one it really needs to capitalize on.
North Carolina State (ACC): 17-10, NET: 53, SOS: 53, vs. Q1: 5-4
NC State likely changed the entire complexion of its season with its 88-66 beating of Duke (6) at home last week. That win is one of five the Wolfpack have in Q1 and helps bring them to a 9-7 mark against Q1 and Q2 competition, which is certainly enough to put them on the right side of the bubble at the moment. Three Q3 losses make things a little interesting, and if losses pile up between now and Selection Sunday, State could undo the good it has done throughout the campaign and definitely last week. The Wolfpack will travel back to Duke on March 2 in a game that could keep them off the bubble for good, but otherwise, it’s Q3 and low-end Q2 competition left in the regular season. More slip ups against poor competition should be avoided, and if they are, a win at Duke and another marquee victory in the ACC Tournament probably won’t even be necessary for an at-large bid.
Oklahoma (Big 12): 16-11, NET: 55, SOS: 36, vs. Q1: 3-9
Oklahoma was looking good for a while, but it has been rough lately. Three losses in a row and five since Jan. 29, including at Kansas State (100) and at Oklahoma State (69), have tanked the team’s NET, and now the Sooners find themselves just 3-9 against Q1 competition and 8-11 in Q1 and Q2 games combined. It has a marquee win, a 69-59 home triumph over West Virginia (17), but even that has less punch than it did as the Mountaineers have entered a skid of their own. Then to boot, Oklahoma is just 2-8 on the road. Zero anchor losses and the framework of a workable resume are there, and games remaining at West Virginia and at home against Texas Tech provide ample opportunities to play their way into the field of 68. But the Sooners are going to have to do something and do it fast to keep pace on the bubble.
Xavier (Big East): 17-10, NET: 43, SOS: 11, vs. Q1: 3-9
The Musketeers are in better shape than most of the bubble, with a 9-10 mark against Q1 and Q2 competition, solid computer numbers and a major road victory at Seton Hall (16) from Feb. 1 on its resume, not to mention only one loss to a team outside the NET top 40. But a 3-9 record versus Q1 and no other particularly eye-grabbing wins leaves Xavier still on the bubble and vulnerable. The team would be wise to take care of business against DePaul (73) at home tonight, then take at least one of its three remaining regular season games, all slated as Q1 opportunities. A losing streak to the end season would not do the Musketeers many favors.
Georgetown (Big East): 15-12, NET: 58, SOS: 18, vs. Q1: 4-10
Georgetown looked so good for an NCAA Tournament bid when it won at Butler, 73-66, on Feb. 15. Then, the Hoyas dropped two straight, including at DePaul on Saturday, giving the Blue Demons just their second conference win of the campaign. Now, Georgetown is only three games above-.500 and 4-10 against Q1 isn’t quite as appetizing as previous marks. The Butler win, but a home triumph over Creighton (9) from Jan. 15 are really what’s keeping the Hoyas in the discussion right now, and with three Q1 shots left, they could add more to that list. But it needs to happen, because too many losses, no matter how good the competition is, won’t cut it.
Providence (Big East): 16-12, NET: 48, SOS: 13, vs. Q1: 7-8
The Friars have shot up the charts and played themselves onto the bubble with a reign of terror over the top half of the Big East. In their three-game winning streak, they have toppled league-leading Seton Hall (16) and Marquette (26), with those wins adding to their collection of previous victories over Creighton, Butler and Marquette the first time, leaving Villanova as the only Big East national contender Providence is yet to slay. The Friars will have their shot, though, this Saturday, and a win in that game would likely take them off the bubble completely. When you have seven wins against Q1 competition, you can shoot up the S-curve quite quick, even if you’ve lost three Q3 games and fell to Long Beach State (290) on a neutral floor.
Indiana (Big Ten): 18-9, NET: 52, SOS: 44, vs. Q1: 6-7
Just when things were starting to look a bit dicey in Bloomington, Indiana rattled off two wins – at Minnesota (42) and Penn State (25) at home – to secure its spot in the field a bit better. The Hoosiers are still on the bubble, but improved computer numbers, six Q1 wins and zero anchor losses have the team ahead of most teams sitting in this category. A 2-6 road record is likely the weakest point of this resume, and the win at Minnesota really helped in that department. Still, there’s more work to be done, and taking a victory at Illinois or at Purdue before the close of the regular season would go a long way for the Hoosiers.
Purdue (Big Ten): 14-14, NET: 36, SOS: 54, vs. Q1: 4-11
Like I’ve said before, a .500 record won’t get into the NCAA Tournament. The Boilermakers are certainly not in at the moment, with the resume they currently have and the remaining games the Big Ten offers them, they could play their way back into the field in the matter of a few games. Purdue’s final three games are all Q1 and Q2 ones, and with two of them at home, it really needs to take advantage. However, a 3-8 road record is the biggest issue with this resume, other than the total number of losses, and the only chance to remedy that left is a March 3 date at Iowa (27). A good end of the regular season and Big Ten Tournament run could save Purdue’s season, but it cannot afford to lose many more games against any competition in any situation.
Minnesota (Big Ten): 13-13, NET: 42, SOS: 47, vs. Q1: 5-9
Minnesota is in more or less the same position as Purdue, just with a slightly worse resume. Like the Boilermakers, the Gophers need to avoid any loss at all to remain in the hunt, it has a poor road record, it has more Q1 wins than most and will have ample opportunity to play their way into the field before Selection Sunday. To start with, the Gophers will host league-leading Maryland (10) on Wednesday, and a win there would do wonders for this resume. A loss would drop it back down below-.500 and make it that much harder to find enough wins to make the committee seriously consider the Gophers. It’s time for Minnesota to put up or shut up and decide if it wants to dance or not.
Northern Iowa (MVC): 21-5, NET: 46, SOS: 98, vs. Q1: 1-1
Northern Iowa could make it easy on itself and simply win the MVC Tournament, but in the event it can’t, finishing the regular season without any Q3 or Q4 anchor losses would be wise. Right now, the Panthers are 5-3 against Q1 and Q2 competition, with a road win at Colorado (18) the shining light their resume. At the moment, UNI would probably be in even without the auto bid, but there is too much basketball to play and too many chances for massive slip ups in the MVC for Northern Iowa to feel safe at all. If the Panthers go unscathed through to the MVC Tournament Final, then they should probably feel good about their at-large chances. If anything else happens, it’s time to chew those fingernails.
Utah State (MWC): 20-7, NET: 38, SOS: 102, vs. Q1: 2-4
Utah State has quietly not destroyed its resume for more than a month now, going 9-1 since losing in overtime at Boise State (88), 88-83, on Jan. 18. The Aggies have beat every team they should have since then, and it has slowly inched them back onto the bubble to where they now sit right on the cutline. USU has no more chances to impress the committee before the MWC Tournament, with only a home date with San Jose State (280) and a road game at New Mexico (148) left. That’s fine, though, assuming Utah State does as it has and wins the games it should. At this point, the Aggies will probably dance if they win out and advance to the MWC Tournament Final, even if they don’t end up beating San Diego State at any point. Simply avoiding anchor losses and maybe picking up a Q2 win or two would probably do it. But the margins are thin.
Stanford (Pac-12): 18-9, NET: 31, SOS: 96, vs. Q1: 2-5
The Cardinal weirdly have a great NET, but a non-conference SOS of 216 is ugly. A 2-5 mark against Q1 is also poor, but a combined 6-8 record versus Q1 and Q2 is okay. There’s not a lot to love on this resume and a little bit to hate, which is why it’s sitting right on the cutline in late February. Three of Stanford’s final four regular season games are currently Q1 games, though, so the team has ever chance to prove itself to the committee even before the Pac-12 Tournament starts. First, though, the Cardinal host Utah (80) on Wednesday in a Q3 game it really cannot avoid to lose right now. Then, picking up a win either at Oregon or at home against Colorado before the end of the regular season might be necessary for an at-large berth.
USC (Pac-12): 19-9, NET: 47, SOS: 60, vs. Q1: 2-7
That 2-7 mark against Q1 is certainly not pleasant, but USC has somewhat made up for it with a 6-1 record versus Q2, bringing its combined mark to a respectable 8-8. Still, its best win is a neutral floor one over LSU (29) from Dec. 21, and since then, a home win against Stanford (31) and road one at Oregon State (68) is the best USC has managed to pull. The Trojans have watched themselves fall from comfortably dancing to close to the cutline, and two losses this week didn’t help, especially the 79-65 one at Utah (80), which will be lucky to see the NIT this March, let alone the NCAA Tournament. Time is running out on USC to make a statement for the committee to hear, although a home date with Arizona (7) this Thursday provides the perfect shot. That has to be the biggest game of the season for the Trojans, and how it goes could be the difference in whether or not they find themselves in the field of 68.
Florida (SEC): 17-10, NET: 33, SOS: 35, vs. Q1: 4-7
Per usual, Florida has pretty good computer numbers that help cover up the blandness of its resume otherwise. A home win against Auburn (28) is nice, but that was in mid-January and the Tigers haven’t done so well lately, lower the value of that victory. Otherwise, neutral wins against Xavier (43) and Providence (48), plus victories at South Carolina (63) and at home over Alabama (40) and Arkansas (45), all bubble teams, is what Florida has to offer the committee. That’s enough to keep the Gators on the right side of the bubble, but for how long? Three of the team’s final four games before the SEC Tournament are Q1 right now, including home dates with Kentucky (21) and LSU (29). Taking at least one of those would go a long way in securing an at-large bid. Failing to pair the Auburn win with another one of substantial substance might make Florida nervous come Selection Sunday.
Alabama (SEC): 15-12, NET: 40, SOS: 23, vs. Q1: 2-6
Alabama has a ton of losses, which is never good. But it also has two wins over NET top 30 teams (Auburn and LSU) and a collection of Q2 wins that are keeping it on the bubble. There are no more shots at marquee wins before the SEC Tournament, and the Crimson Tide might need to make some noise in that event to get into the NCAA Tournament. But it would still help to pick up more victories and avoid more Ls, especially with 12 already, and it starts with a game at Mississippi State (57) tonight that could essentially function as an elimination game. Both teams are desperately in need of a win, and adding a Q1/Q2 win wouldn’t be so bad, either. Bubble lovers have to tune in to this one.
Mississippi State (SEC): 17-10, NET: 57, SOS: 49, vs. Q1: 2-6
The Bulldogs have done a really good job of doing enough to remain on the bubble without doing enough to get on the right side of the bubble, which is probably not what Starkville is hoping for. A road win at Florida (33) from Jan. 28 is the best thing Mississippi State has to offer, and its not enough by itself. A 3-6 road record, two anchor losses and only two Q1 wins don’t inspire much. But it can change, and it starts with taking care of Alabama (40) at home tonight for what would be a valuable fifth Q2 win. If Mississippi State fails tonight, though, it will need to go on a serious run in the SEC Tournament to get an at-large bid even if it otherwise wins out in the regular season.
Arkansas (SEC): 17-10, NET: 45, SOS: 26, vs. Q1: 2-6
Arkansas finally ended its five-game losing streak with a 78-68 home win against Missouri (89), which counts as a Q3 W and doesn’t do a whole lot for the Razorbacks other than not hurt them. It’s good to get on the right side of a game for once, but it doesn’t forgive the previous skid, plus dropping eight of 11 games since Jan. 18. The only game of note left on the regular season schedule is versus LSU (29) at home March 4, and Arkansas has to have it to remain on the bubble. It also cannot avoid many more other losses before the SEC Tournament, including its home date with Tennessee (64) on Wednesday. It can be done, but the Hogs have dug themselves in a hole that they’ll have to play incredibly well to escape.
South Carolina (SEC): 16-11, NET: 63, SOS: 63, vs. Q1: 4-7
The Gamecocks are holding on to bubble relevancy for dear life. If not for four Q1 wins and a 7-9 combined record against Q1 and Q2 competition, I would have dropped South Carolina off the bubble. But those collection of wins is just barely enough to keep the dream alive. One more loss would effectively end it, though, which means the Gamecocks cannot lose to Georgia (90) at home Wednesday. They also have to beat Alabama (40) on the road three days later. Do that, and then perhaps some more serious consideration will come Columbia’s way. Otherwise, enjoy the NIT.
ETSU (Southern): 22-4, NET: 39, SOS: 151, vs. Q1: 2-1
ETSU has been taking care of business for a while now, rattling off seven straight after losing, 71-55, at home to Mercer (197) on Jan. 29. It was one of two conference losses the team has absorbed this season, and it doesn’t look like it plans on adding too many more. At this point, two Q3 remain for the regular season, then the SoCon Tournament. Realistically, only Furman and UNCG offer ETSU any shot at winning a game that the committee will care about, and the Buccaneers won’t be able to beat them both in the conference tournament without earning the auto bid. If ETSU goes undefeated from now until the SoCon Tournament Final, it will have a real shot at an at-large bid. However, there’s no way for it to really feel safe if it doesn’t get the auto bid, so taking care of that would probably be the best path forward.
BUBBLE BURSTING
Tulsa (AAC): 18-9, NET: 81, SOS: 149, vs. Q1: 2-3
VCU (A-10): 17-10, NET: 59, SOS: 46, vs. Q1: 1-7
Notre Dame (ACC): 17-10, NET: 56, SOS: 124, vs. Q1: 2-6
Clemson (ACC): 14-12, NET: 74, SOS: 48, vs. Q1: 2-6
Liberty (A-Sun): 24-3, NET: 50, SOS: 298, vs. Q1: 0-1
Texas (Big 12): 17-11, NET: 66, SOS: 38, vs. Q1: 3-8
Oregon State (Pac-12): 15-12, NET: 68, SOS: 99, vs. Q1: 4-4
UCLA (Pac-12): 16-11, NET: 76, SOS: 74, vs. Q1: 5-5
Tennessee (SEC): 15-12, NET: 64, SOS: 32, vs. Q1: 1-9
UNCG (Southern): 21-6, NET: 62, SOS: 146, vs. Q1: 1-2
Stephen F. Austin (Southland): 21-3, NET: 87, SOS: 342, vs. Q1: 1-2
