News & gear by players, for players ★ Powered by Fivestar App ★ Grow The Game®
Welcome to Bubble Watch 2020, keeping tabs how teams stack up relative to the bubble, with explanations from our expert bracketologist, Justin Meyer.

Bubble Watch: Locks, Should Be, Over, On & Bursting

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: locksshould be inover the bubbleon 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 Friday afternoon on Feb. 28, 2020:

LOCKS

Dayton (A-10): 26-2, NET: 4, SOS: 27, vs. Q1: 4-2

Louisville (ACC): 23-6, NET: 10, SOS: 29, vs. Q1: 4-4

Florida State (ACC): 24-4, NET: 7, SOS: 34, vs. Q1: 5-3

Duke (ACC): 25-2, NET: 6, SOS: 33, vs. Q1: 4-2

Baylor (Big 12): 25-2, NET: 2, SOS: 72, 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: 15, SOS: 20, vs. Q1: 10-5

Butler (Big East): 19-9, NET: 21, SOS: 40, vs. Q1: 8-7

Villanova (Big East): 22-6, NET: 12, SOS: 4, vs. Q1: 8-6

Creighton (Big East): 21-6, NET: 8, SOS: 22, vs. Q1: 9-6

Maryland (Big Ten): 23-5, NET: 9, SOS: 43, vs. Q1: 7-5

Penn State (Big Ten): 21-7, NET: 26, SOS: 113, vs. Q1: 7-5

Michigan State (Big Ten): 19-9, NET: 13, SOS: 60, vs. Q1: 6-8

Iowa (Big Ten): 19-9, NET: 29, SOS: 84, vs. Q1: 7-7

Ohio State (Big Ten): 19-9, NET: 16, SOS: 56, vs. Q1: 5-8

Michigan (Big Ten): 18-10, NET: 25, SOS: 58, vs. Q1: 7-9

Wisconsin (Big Ten): 18-10, NET: 28, SOS: 25, vs. Q1: 8-7

San Diego State (MWC): 26-1, NET: 5, SOS: 105, vs. Q1: 4-0

Oregon (Pac-12): 22-7, NET: 19, SOS: 6, vs. Q1: 7-5

Colorado (Pac-12): 21-8, NET: 22, SOS: 11, vs. Q1: 7-3

Auburn (SEC): 24-4, NET: 27, SOS: 44, vs. Q1: 3-2

Kentucky (SEC): 23-5, NET: 18, SOS: 92, vs. Q1: 6-3

Gonzaga (WCC): 28-2, NET: 3, SOS: 152, vs. Q1: 5-2

BYU (WCC): 22-7, NET: 14, SOS: 31, vs. Q1: 3-4

SHOULD BE IN

Houston (AAC): 21-7, NET: 23, 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 (53), Memphis (62) and at UConn (66), 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.

Marquette (Big East): 18-9, NET: 24, SOS: 5, vs. Q1: 5-8

The Golden Eagles got off the schneid with one of their best performances of the season, smacking Georgetown back to D.C. with an offensive explosion, 93-72. The win certainly helps stabilize the resume a bit, but what is ultimately a Q2 win isn’t enough to officially lock Marquette up. Still, it brings the team that much closer, and I would be pretty surprised if Marquette’s name wasn’t called on Selection Sunday.

Arizona (Pac-12): 19-9, NET: 11, SOS: 3, vs. Q1: 3-7

Arizona would probably be a lock had it taken care of USC in LA on Thursday, but it didn’t, and it didn’t look too good in the process. A team with computer numbers like the Wildcats won’t be left out of the Big Dance, although a collection of losses could harm that precious NET, which is the major thing keeping Arizona comfortably in the field at the moment. But I can’t lock up a team that is only 3-7 against Q1 competition and is yet to beat a definite tournament team away from home. It shouldn’t take too much to push Arizona over into lockdom, but it can’t keep losing and not expect to get punished.

OVER THE BUBBLE

Virginia (ACC): 20-7, NET: 51, SOS: 83, vs. Q1: 3-3

The Cavaliers needed a late winner from Kihei Clark to survive their in-state rivals Virginia Tech (85), 56-53, escaping a loss that could have knocked them down onto the bubble. But it doesn’t matter. Virginia won, gaining a Q2 win and inching closer to safety. The team still isn’t totally in the clear, although home opportunities against Duke (6) and Louisville (10) offer chances to solidify a bid. As long as Virginia wins at Miami (103), though, and doesn’t totally flame out of the ACC Tournament, it should be in the tournament. But it wouldn’t be as comfortable as it’d like compared to if it added another high-end win to its resume.

Texas Tech (Big 12): 18-10, NET: 20, SOS: 87, vs. Q1: 3-9

Texas Tech’s strange resume gets stranger with a loss that was technically at Oklahoma (49), although it was played in Oklahoma City. The Red Raiders are now an ugly 3-9 in Q1 games and 7-10 overall against Q1 and Q2 competition. But marquee victories versus Louisville at Madison Square Garden in December and a home triumph over West Virginia (17) on Jan. 29, plus a fantastic NET and zero anchor losses, have Tech still over the bubble. But with the team’s two final games of the regular season being at Baylor (2) and Kansas at home (1), the home date with Texas (65) this Saturday is a borderline must-win, unless Texas Tech wants to need to beat two of the best teams in the country or go on a considerable run in the Big 12 Tournament in order to play its way off the bubble.

Illinois (Big Ten): 18-9, NET: 36, SOS: 90, vs. Q1: 5-7

The Illini cleaned up their intrastate counterparts Northwestern (177) on the road, 74-66, avoiding what would have been a serious issue had a loss occurred. Illinois is working with five quad one victories, four of which came on the road, and an 8-8 composite Q1 and Q2 record. If the team stays on the path of taking care of business when it should, it’ll be in the tournament. Next up is a home date with Indiana (56). A loss likely wouldn’t tumble Illinois down to the bubble, but it would add some pressure to win one of its final two regular season games. With those being at Ohio State (16) and Iowa (29) in Champaign, I’d rather handle Indiana if I were the Illini.

Arizona State (Pac-12): 19-9, NET: 45, SOS: 17, vs. Q1: 5-6

Arizona State’s seven-game winning streak came to an end Thursday. It took a last-second shot to break a tie for it to happen as UCLA (76) defeated ASU, 75-72, but all that means is a slightly smaller NET hit. Fortunately for the Sun Devils, though, they did plenty during the previous seven games to be able to absorb this L and remain a solid distance over the bubble. Wins against Arizona (11), Oregon (19), USC (44) and at Stanford (30) are a good collection to have, a 6-4 road record is better than much of the bubble and the computer numbers pass the test. At this point, Arizona State would have to blow this bid through losing games it shouldn’t, like against Washington (63) and Washington State (119) at home, its final two games of the regular season. But it could also topple USC (44) in Los Angeles this Saturday for its sixth Q1 win of the campaign and make things near elementary.

USC (Pac-12): 20-9, NET: 44, SOS: 61, vs. Q1: 4-7

The wonders a marquee win can do for a resume. USC added the high-end win it has needed all season long by conquering Arizona (11), 57-48, at home Thursday, filling the biggest hole in its resume. It was enough to get the team off and over the bubble in my eyes, though there is still plenty of work to be done. Losses in the final two games to close the regular season – homes dates with Arizona State (45) and UCLA (76) – would probably knock this resume back down, unless the rest of the bubble tanked, too. But for the time being, USC is off the bubble, and a win against ASU on Saturday would potentially keep it there.

LSU (SEC): 19-9, NET: 33, SOS: 8, vs. Q1: 4-7

In the previous Bubble Watch, I said that we would learn a lot about where LSU stands in its game against Florida. Well, we learned. Will Wade admitted after that 81-66 beating that “we got whipped in every phase of the game. Not much else to say. We got killed.” He was right, and although it’s only a road Q1 loss, its also the team’s fifth failure in seven tries. The resume doesn’t get hit too hard from this setback, but it’s just one of many that have been hitting it for about a month now. The closest thing to a tournament team LSU has left is at Arkansas on March 4. Otherwise, it’s three games against teams that won’t move the needle in a good way. The Tigers better get it together and avoid those anchor losses or they’re going to find themselves on the bubble or worse.

Florida (SEC): 18-10, NET: 32, SOS: 32, vs. Q1: 4-7

Even with how bad LSU has played lately, beating them still carries weight. Florida is now 7-10 versus Q1 and Q2 opponents with zero anchor losses and great computer numbers. At this point, this team is no longer on the bubble, and it can stay that way even without a win against Kentucky (18) at home in its final regular season game (although a victory there would probably lock it up). But what can’t happen is losses at Tennessee (69) and at Georgia (90) in the two games beforehand. Losses in both would certainly put the Gators back on the bubble and in a position to have to beat Kentucky or do some damage in the SEC Tournament to feel comfortable. It would be best to avoid that.

St. Mary’s (WCC): 23-6, NET: 31, SOS: 76, vs. Q1: 3-3

Not much has changed since a few days ago for the Gaels. They outlasted Santa Clara (138), 78-72, on the road Thursday, getting revenge for a home loss to the Broncos that stands as one of the team’s two Q3 blemishes. But the 7-4 mark versus Q1 and Q2 opposition and top-35 NET put St. Mary’s in the field right now. The only regular season game left is at Gonzaga (3) on Saturday. A win in that game would lock the Gaels into an at-large bid no matter what happens in the WCC Tournament. A loss wouldn’t hurt much or knock the team down onto the bubble. However, a loss in its first conference tournament game as well, especially if it’s to a team with a poor enough NET, could make the Gaels nervous on Selection Sunday. In other words, St. Mary’s still needs to win one more game to be certain its in, and at this point, it probably doesn’t matter which one it is.

ON THE BUBBLE

Cincinnati (AAC): 18-9, NET: 53, SOS: 16, vs. Q1: 2-5

It was 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 (48) 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 (23) 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): 19-9, NET: 62, SOS: 81, vs. Q1: 2-4

In classic bubble team fashion, Memphis decided to follow its best win of the season – Houston (23) at home – that got it back into real at-large discussion with a pitiful performance at SMU (81). The Tigers fell, 58-53, and knocked themselves back down to the very threads of the bubble. The computer numbers are below par, there are three Q3 losses to lament, and 2-4 against Q1 isn’t good enough to make up for it all. The margin for error is back to very slim for Memphis, and that means it absolutely cannot lose at Tulane (172) on Saturday or it won’t be on the bubble by Sunday.

Wichita State (AAC): 21-7, NET: 48, SOS: 91, vs. Q1: 2-4

Under no circumstances could Wichita State afford to absorb a loss to Temple (110) at home, and it barely avoided it, 72-69. To illustrate just how brutal that loss would have been for this resume, the Shockers dropped four spots in NET just for winning. But, disaster was averted, and Wichita State still sits right on the bubble where it was before. The Shockers have beaten no one of major consequence – their only wins against possible at-large teams are home against Oklahoma (49) and South Carolina (64) at a neutral site – and their two Q1 wins are at UConn (66) and at Oklahoma State (70). That’s not going to get the committee excited, and unfortunately, neither would wins against Tulsa (83), at Memphis (62) or at SMU (81). That doesn’t mean Wichita State can afford to lose, though. But the main point is, the Shockers are either going to have to beat Houston in the AAC Tournament, because it’s the only high-end win available in the league, or otherwise clean up the teams it should. The Shockers should be quite concerned for their future.

Richmond (A-10): 21-7, NET: 52, SOS: 89, vs. Q1: 3-4

The Spiders avoided a horrendous scar on its resume by narrowly winning at George Washington (190), 73-70, on Wednesday. Their NET even got knocked a few spots for the W, a sign of how bad things could have been had it been an L. But Richmond lived to tell the tale, and its remains squarely on the cutline as a result. None of its three remaining regular season games will move the needle too much in a positive way, although adding two more Q2 wins with a home date with Davidson (71) and at Duquesne (92) would be very nice for a resume that only has four victories against the top two quadrants. But first, the Spiders cannot lose to UMass (141) at home Saturday. Like the GW game, it would tank this resume and force Richmond to do something major in the A-10 Tournament to make up for it.

Rhode Island (A-10): 20-7, NET: 40, SOS: 73, vs. Q1: 1-5

The Rams almost threw their season away at Fordham (272) on Wednesday, but they just barely got away with a 76-75 win. Like with Richmond and Wichita State, the close win against bad competition hurt the team’s NET a bit, which shows how drastic things would have been had it gone the other way. But like those teams, that’s not what happened, and URI is still alive and probably in for the time being. Rhode Island has a home game against Saint Louis (68) on Sunday, and it would be good to add a Q2 win to its resume and avoid taking a further hit to its NET. But the true prize is in its next game: Dayton (4) at home. A win in that one would likely take the Rams off the bubble and make Selection Sunday significantly less stressful. Can Rhody get it done when it needs to most?

North Carolina State (ACC): 17-11, NET: 57, SOS: 70, vs. Q1: 5-3

You can’t help but laugh at how ridiculous NC State is every year. How the same team that blows the doors off Duke (6) can also fail miserably against North Carolina (94) twice and at Boston College (147) is beyond me, but if there is one program that can do it, it’s State. It feels like an annual thing at this point, but the Wolfpack are on the bubble in late February, and they only have themselves to blame. Let me be clear: there is plenty of good on this resume. A 5-3 record against Q1 is fantastic, and 8-8 versus Q1 and Q2 is solid, too. The Duke win is huge, and a home triumph against Wisconsin (28) on Dec. 4 is important as well. But a falling NET and three Q3 defeats, plus road losses at UNC, Virginia Tech (85), Georgia Tech (78) and Clemson (77) – all teams that won’t be in the Dance without a major change of fortune – are the strikes and why State is where it is. A win at Duke would cure a lot of those ailments, but the Wolfpack have proven they can throw that goodwill away. Avoiding more bad home losses to Wake Forest (104) and Pittsburgh (111) might be even more important.

Oklahoma (Big 12): 17-11, NET: 49, SOS: 35, vs. Q1: 4-9

Finally, a bubble team that really did something good for itself this week. Oklahoma took care of Texas Tech (20), 65-51, in what was considered a home game, although it was played in Oklahoma City. As a result, the Sooners moved into the top 50 of NET and have four Q1 victories, two of those against teams with top-20 NETs. A 2-8 road record is still a big issue, though, and completing the sweep over West Virginia (17) on Saturday when Oklahoma travels to Morgantown would kill several birds with one stone. If the Sooners are really serious about making the NCAA Tournament, they’ll take advantage of a reeling Mountaineers team with a high NET (i.e., the perfect storm for a bubble team needing a big win) and show the committee they deserve to be in the Field of 68.

Xavier (Big East): 18-10, NET: 42, SOS: 10, vs. Q1: 3-9

Xavier took care of DePaul, 78-67, as it continues to trend water over the last few games, beating the teams it should and losing to the teams it should. Its resume is good enough for that to be okay for now, although to feel safe, the Musketeers need to add at least one more Q1 win to its team sheet. All three of their final regular season games are currently Q1 games – at Georgetown (58), at Providence (50) and Butler (21) – and each would move the needle at least to some degree. Going 3-0 would lock Xavier. Depending on which games had which results, 2-1 would do it, too. Going 0-3 would cause some serious problems, and going 1-2 would probably leave Xavier on the bubble and needing to win at least one game in the Big East Tournament to feel good about itself.

Georgetown (Big East): 15-13, NET: 58, SOS: 21, vs. Q1: 4-11

After winning at Butler (21), 73-66, on Feb. 15 to put themselves on the bubble, the Hoyas have lost three straight and essentially destroyed what they did in Hinkle. The latest defeat was at Marquette (24), 93-72, which at least doesn’t hurt as bad as the previous two. Still, the losses are beginning to pile up, and the committee has only twice allowed a team with a record two games above-.500 an at-large bid. Looking at this resume right now, this isn’t going to be the third, so Georgetown needs to win some games, any games, to have a shot at getting into the tournament. Dates at Creighton (8) and Villanova (12) at home, plus a home game with Xavier (42), are coming up. This resume can’t take too many more Ls.

Providence (Big East): 16-12, NET: 50, SOS: 15, 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 (15) and Marquette (24), with those wins adding to their collection of previous victories over Creighton (8), Butler (21) and Marquette the first time, leaving Villanova (12) 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 (298) on a neutral floor.

Indiana (Big Ten): 18-10, NET: 56, SOS: 47, vs. Q1: 6-8

The volatility of Indiana’s NET is scary, and it’s something to keep in mind with its remaining schedule. The Hoosiers fell quite a few spots for losing on the road at Purdue (35), 57-49, which seems more harsh than you’d think. But it’s a sign of how crucial it is for Indiana to collect more wins, although that’s easier said than done in the Big Ten. Indiana travels to Illinois (36) on Sunday, then has a home date with Minnesota (46) before finishing the regular season with Wisconsin (28) in Bloomington. With a 2-7 road record, picking up a win in Champaign would be the best thing the Hoosiers could do for themselves, but in general, they just need to win. A 2-1 or better record would all but wrap things up in a good way, but 1-2 or 0-3 would mean some work would need to be done in the Big Ten Tournament to save the season. Indiana is in for the time being, but will it stay that way?

Purdue (Big Ten): 15-14, NET: 35, SOS: 50, vs. Q1: 4-11

Like I explained before, the committee has only ever selected two teams that finished two games over-.500. Purdue has the NET and could potentially find the wins to become the third, but that means winning enough games to be in that position. Completing the regular season sweep of arch rival Indiana, 57-49, certainly helps as every win does with the record the Boilermakers have built, but Purdue needs more. A road game at Iowa (29) and a Mackey date with Rutgers (34) are all that’s left in the regular season, and Purdue needs to win both to create some sort of cushion for itself in the Big Ten Tournament. Otherwise, and as it stands now, the Boilers will have to go on a bit of a run in the conference tournament.

Rutgers (Big Ten): 17-11, NET: 34, SOS: 42, vs. Q1: 3-9

Rutgers was ahead in State College with only moments remaining in the game, and a road win at Penn State (26) would have solved so many of the Scarlet Knight’s problems. But that didn’t happen, because instead Myles Dread nailed a triple to put the Nittany Lions back up after having blown a 21-point lead, and Penn State would hold on, 65-64. Now, Rutgers is still left searching for a quality road win, or really any road win at all, considering the team is 1-8 in such situations. A good opportunity, and its last, remains for an away win: at Purdue (35) on March 7. Before then, though Rutgers gets Maryland (9) at home, and although it wouldn’t remedy the road record, a win over the Terps would give the Scarlet Knights three top-30 NET Ws and eight Q1 and Q2 triumphs. That would be enough to get back off the bubble, although this team needs two more wins to feel like a lock for the Big Dance.

Northern Iowa (MVC): 22-5, NET: 43, SOS: 111, vs. Q1: 1-1

After two-straight losses at Loyola Chicago (98) and at Indiana State (102), UNI got back in form with two-straight wins: at homes against Southern Illinois (157) and Evansville (253). Those wins don’t do much other than avoid catastrophe, but that’s really all the Panthers can do at this point. Their only scheduled game left is at Drake (163) on Saturday, and a Q3 win isn’t going to lock UNI up. There aren’t any opponents in the MVC for Northern Iowa to get much from, which is why the team probably needs to win out until the MVC Tournament Final to feel good about its at-large chances. Losses in any other games will add anchors to a resume that doesn’t need any more. And while UNI is taking care of the teams it should, it can also put a lot of energy into rooting for Colorado (22), it’s marquee win from a road game Dec. 10. The Buffaloes have lost two in a row and their NET has slipped a bit, which is a bad sign for the Panthers. Outside of Boulder, Colorado’s biggest fans should be found in Cedar Falls.

Utah State (MWC): 21-7, NET: 37, SOS: 124, vs. Q1: 2-4

Since losing at Boise State (93) in overtime, 88-83, in Jan. 18, Utah State has taken care of business against the teams it should. It did lose at San Diego State (5) since then, squandering its second of two cracks at the MWC’s best team, but without any other Ls, the Aggies have very slowly climbed onto the bubble. Now, the team is sitting right on the cutline, and for that to change, it will need to win at New Mexico (158) on Saturday in its final regular season game, then make a run to the MWC Tournament Final. The only MWC team that would really move the needle for Utah State is San Diego State, and those two teams aren’t going to meet until the auto bid is on the line, if at all. So, all USU can do for its at-large hopes is win all its games and root as hard as possible for Florida (32) and LSU (33), its marquee neutral site non-conference wins that are the reason why the Aggies are alive for the tournament right now.

Stanford (Pac-12): 18-9, NET: 30, SOS: 101, vs. Q1: 3-5

Stanford handled Utah (88) at home, 70-62, like it should have and needed to Wednesday. The Cardinal remain on the cutline with the result, now shifting focus to a home date with Colorado (22) on Sunday that could change the course of their season. Stanford could lose this game and make up for it in others enough to still make the NCAA Tournament, but you really can’t beat how great of an opportunity this is. You have a top-30 NET team that has lost two straight and is seemingly in a rut coming to your house in the third-to-last regular season game when you desperately need a second major win on your resume. You couldn’t have scheduled it better. The Cardinal don’t have to win this game, but they’re not going to get a better shot to play themselves into the tournament.

UCLA (Pac-12): 17-11, NET: 76, SOS: 67, vs. Q1: 5-6

Welcome to the bubble, UCLA! It only took a six-game winning streak, including victories at Arizona (11), at Colorado (22) and at home against Arizona State (45) to get the Bruins here, but here they are. UCLA is 5-6 in Q1 games, with three Ws over top-30 NET teams, and 8-9 versus Q1 and Q2 competition combined. Add in a 5-4 road record, and you can see the positives to this resume. But consider an NET of 76, a non-conference SOS of 217 and home losses to Hofstra (123) and Cal State Fullerton (267) in the non-conference, and you can see why there are some issues here. The Bruins have done a lot to make up for those ugly marks, and that NET can improve with more wins. But right now, UCLA is on the wrong side of the bubble with work to do. Let’s see what happens if it can tackle Arizona (11) at home for the season sweep Saturday, though. Extend the winning streak to seven, and UCLA might find itself on the right side of the bubble.

Alabama (SEC): 15-13, NET: 39, SOS: 14, vs. Q1: 1-7

After losing at Mississippi State (54), 80-73, on Tuesday, things are getting dire in Tuscaloosa. Alabama now officially has a record problem, as in, it needs to win some damn games, because that record isn’t very good. The Crimson Tide are a putrid 1-7 in Q1 games, and that’s nowhere near good enough to compete in this bubble. The good news is this resume has the skeleton of a good one: top-40 NET, good SOS numbers and six Q2 wins. This is salvageable, although it’ll take a strong close to the regular season and some damage in the SEC Tournament for Alabama to feel at all safe. If the team doesn’t get a win against South Carolina (64) at home Saturday, it will fall off the bubble.

Mississippi State (SEC): 18-10, NET: 54, SOS: 53, vs. Q1: 2-6

The Bulldogs don’t have a very exciting resume, which is why they’re on the outside looking in for the time being. But the framework is there, and Mississippi State won a huge bubble game against Alabama (39) at home Tuesday, a Q2 win, its fourth of the season. MSU is now 6-8 versus Q1 and Q2 competition together, which is meh but workable. Middling computer numbers and no real marquee wins outside of a road one at Florida (32) from Jan. 28 mean Mississippi State has plenty of work to do, but it can be done. A loss at Missouri (86) in the next game needs to be avoided, though. A win would help sooth a 3-6 road record and add another Q2 W to the mix, and the Bulldogs need all the positives they can get, even if they come against non-tournament teams.

Arkansas (SEC): 18-10, NET: 41, SOS: 26, vs. Q1: 2-6

Arkansas with Isaiah Joe is quite different from Arkansas without Isaiah, and Tennessee got stuck with Arkansas with Isaiah Joe this week. The Razorbacks blew away the Vols, 86-69, for their first win of 15 points or more since Jan. 15, and are in position to get an at-large bid. The team is currently on the wrong side of the cutline, but that can be remedied with more performances like the one against Tennessee. Its last three regular season games are all Q2 ones at the moment: at Georgia (90), LSU (33) and at Texas A&M (117), with varying levels of significance to each. A 2-6 Q1 mark and 5-10 combined Q1 and Q2 record illustrate the importance of adding more quality wins to this resume, which is really the only weakness of this resume. LSU is the best chance the Razorbacks have at adding one in the regular season, and the conference tournament could help out a lot with that. Otherwise, Arkansas needs to keep its bad losses at zero and prove to the committee that the team without Joe should be ignored, and the team with Joe deserves to be in the field.

South Carolina (SEC): 17-11, NET: 64, SOS: 66, vs. Q1: 3-6

The Gamecocks nearly let themselves fall off the bubble, needing overtime to dispatch of Georgia (90) at home, 94-90. They live to see another day, but they’re still just hanging on by a thread. Bad computer numbers and two anchor losses are the major strikes against them, but a home win over Kentucky (18) and 7-9 combined record in Q1 and Q2 games is why South Carolina is still sticking around. That said, there isn’t a margin for error. South Carolina must win at Alabama (39) on Saturday to gain another Q1 win and help out its NET more. Otherwise, it’ll be quite the uphill climb in the SEC Tournament, assuming the team even wins enough in the regular season for that to matter.

ETSU (SoCon): 23-4, NET: 38, SOS: 153, vs. Q1: 2-2

It took a while, but ETSU eventually put away Wofford (151) on the road, 60-54, to extend its winning streak to eight. The Buccaneers close the regular season with Western Carolina (143) at home Saturday, aiming to complete an undefeated February. A loss would hurt quite a bit, a win wouldn’t do anything but keep ETSU alive. That’s the unfortunate situation for teams in this situation. What ETSU can do for its at-large chances: root for LSU (33), its marquee win from the non-conference, to turn it around and get back to winning, and not lose until the SoCon Tournament Final. If it gets to the conference tournament championship, though, it might be a good idea to just make it official and win the auto bid at that point.

BUBBLE BURSTING

Tulsa (AAC): 19-9, NET: 83, SOS: 162, vs. Q1: 2-3

Notre Dame (ACC): 18-10, NET: 55, SOS: 131, vs. Q1: 1-6

Syracuse (ACC): 16-12, NET: 59, SOS: 41, vs. Q1: 2-6

Liberty (A-Sun): 25-3, NET: 47, SOS: 319, vs. Q1: 0-1

Texas (Big 12): 17-11, NET: 65, SOS: 36, vs. Q1: 3-7

Minnesota (Big Ten): 13-14, NET: 46, SOS: 39, vs. Q1: 5-11

Tennessee (SEC): 15-13, NET: 69, SOS: 30, vs. Q1: 1-9

Stephen F. Austin (Southland): 22-3, NET: 84, SOS: 342, vs. Q1: 1-2

Previous Article
Bracketology 2020 is about to kick it up a notch as we have officially entered March. Selection Sunday is around the corner.

Bracketology 2020: Predicting the NCAA Tournament

Next Article
Yeshiva men's basketball won the Skyline Conference title Sunday, an incredible accomplishment from a program that puts prayer first.

Faith before basketball for Yeshiva University champions

Total
5
Share