2025 NCAA Tournament Selection Watch (Bubble + Other)

[jncuse]

A little more chaos, for a team most don't mind losing in Ohio St.


Iowa takes out Ohio St... its just a Q2 loss for Ohio St, but it does weaken the teams right above the line (Ohio St was last team in per the current matrix (79 of 97), which helps a UNC or Texas if they get a follow up win tomorrow,

 

[jncuse]

I'd say the big loser today was Ohio St.

Big winner is probably Oklahoma locking up with a Q1 win, and Texas with a Q1 win below the line.

UNC, Ohio St, Xavier for 2 spots is not a clear choice.

 

[jncuse]

Conference week Thursday/Friday is usually the best day for bubble chaos, as all conferences are going and more Q1 win opportunities come up

Per the Matrix entering today (I'm making a few adjustments on rankings based on where I think things are at after yesterday) Only listing teams that I think are on the bubble still and not locks.

(Out of 100)
Utah St 100 *
West Virginia 100 **
San Diego St 100
VCU 100
Indiana 98
Xavier 93
Ohio St 73 ***
-----------------
UNC 13 ***
Texas 4 ***
Boise St 8
UC Irvine 7


* Utah St is at 9.75 per matrix. Lose to UNLV today probably still get in, but MWC always tough to read, and as you there is Boise and San Diego St on the list as well.

** West Virginia probably surives there loss to 3-17 Colorado (only a Q2), but I can't quite put them on lock.

*** With Ohio St losing to Iowa, and Texas with a Q1 win yesterday, I feel UNC, Texas, and Ohio St are all very close for that final spot. Also Xaxier's resume is mixed. I may go with UNC in that spot right now.

Arkansas, Oklahoma, Baylor are in the Last 8 In per the Matrix yesterday, but with their wins yesterday they are locks, and I'm taking them off.

Bubble Busters Playing Today - None other than VCU above. Memphis and UC San Diego start tomorrow.

 

[jncuse]

Today's Schedule

12:00 Indiana (3rd Last in) vs Q1 Oregon
2:30 UNC (First Out) vs Q2 Wake Forest
2:30 Xavier (2nd Last In) vs Q1 Marquette
3:30 Texas (2nd Out) vs Q1 Texas A&M
5:30 San Diego St (5th Last in) vs Boise St (3rd Out), both bottom Q1 teams.
11:30 Utah St (7th last in) vs UNLV (Q2)

In terms of ACC. I will also add that is SMU beat Clemson, they possibly get into a play-in game vs Louisville on Friday. Or if wake pulls off the Tobacco road double knockout (UNC and Duke) they probably get back in the at-large discussion.

 

[jncuse]

It's been a tough few days for the B10. They had 2 teams right on the bubble line -- Indiana and Ohio St, and they both lost their first few games. Over 50% chance that loss does in Ohio St, and Indiana while fairly safe is not a lock.

This is due to UNC winning 2 games. and Texas looking like it might get 2 Q1 wins in the SEC tournament.

What do you hate more -- 14 SEC teams in the tournament or 10 BIG teams? That is what it might come down to if Texas wins today.

 

[jncuse]

Xavier blew a chance at a Q1 win against Marquette that would arguably have been enough to lock down a bad for them.

Right now I feel like its 6 teams battling for 4 spots (before bubble busters).
San Diego St
Indiana
Ohio St
Xavier
UNC
Texas (assuming they win this afternoon)

 

[cuseattle]

Xavier blew a chance at a Q1 win against Marquette that would arguably have been enough to lock down a bad for them.

Right now I feel like its 6 teams battling for 4 spots (before bubble busters).
San Diego St
Indiana
Ohio St
Xavier
UNC
Texas (assuming they win this afternoon)

Texas and A&M in OT

 

[MSOrange]

Texas and A&M in OT

Double overtime! Thanks for the heads up! I don't normally watch the SEC Network

 

[jncuse]

Texas won in OT against projected top 5 seed— more upwards pressure from below the line.

San Diego St who was last 4 in, lost to Boise State who was first 4 out.

Things are much more cloudy in terms of who is/in our right now than Tuesday morning.

 

[jncuse]

Per Matrix Entering Today
Only Considers 69 entered today

San Diego St 64 - Done
Indiana 57 - Done
UNC 48 - Today vs Duke (7:00)
Texas 48 - vs Tennessee (3:30)
----- IN/OUT Line -------
Xavier 37 - Done
Boise St 14 - Today vs New Mexico (9:30)
Ohio St 6

While Texas and UNC have reason to believe, they can't feel locked without a win.
Boise St can also consider to built its case with a Q1.
Ohio St's lost to Iowa was crushing to their case.

Bubble Busters Still Playing Today (Lose and they take away a spot)
Memphis - Slide by Wichita St 83-80
VCU - Beat St. Bon 76-59
UC San Diego - 9:00 vs UC Santa Barbara

I would also add that Colorado St could still a bid by winning the MWC, which is still reasonable.

Don't think there is anybody else we need to watch right now.

 

[NineOneSeven]

The MWC is always just obnoxious.

 

[jncuse]

Today's relevant games before discussing yesterday. They are all bid stealer type games.

Bid Stealer Possibilities (if Memphis loses for sure it closes a spot, and possibly if VCU or UCSD lose)
1:00: VCU (proj #11seed) vs Loyola Chicago (KP#109), Semi's
3:00: Memphis (proj #8 seed) vs Tulane (KP #144), Semi's.
9:30: UCSanDiego (proj #12 seed) vs UC Irvine (KP#65), Finals. - will discuss UCSD in a post below.

Certain Bid Stealer - MWC FInals
6:00 Boise St vs Colorado St two teams that are in the first 5 or 6 teams out (or perhaps Boise is last team in) one team for sure takes a spot. At this point you probably cheer for Boise St. if you are on the bubble, as they have a chance as an at large as well.

 

[jncuse]

Yesterday (Friday)

Can break yesterday up into 2 points:

#1 - MWC Chaos - If you were a bubble team yesterday you wanted the 2 MWC teams that are probably clearly in the tournament to win (New Mexico and Utah St). Well they both lost. That means that one of Boise St / Colorado St will be stealing a bid. Boise St might actually be last one or two in for some people, so if for UNC for example, its probably best Boise St wins, so they don't sneak an at-large if they lose.

#2 Texas and UNC Lose "marquee" games
On one hand the loss shouldn't make your ranking worse. On the other hand a win would have locked a bid / allowed you to jump people. And not worried about bid stealers.

Say the committee had UNC/Texas ahead of Indiana before the games, they aren't suddenly putting Indiana ahead of UNC/Texas because of the losses. But, the committee may have also had Indiana ahead of them before the game -- and that is where the loss mattered.

And with a bid stealer (#1 above), now one of, if not both UNC and Texas are likely out.

 

[jncuse]

The MWC is always just obnoxious.

Of course the MWC is the one conference that looks like it will benefit from a bid stealer with none of the 3 teams that were in on Monday, winning the conference.

Its above 50% likely, that they will go from 3 teams in to 4 teams in after this week.
Although its plausible, that Boise St/Colorado St winner tonight, could steal a bid from San Diego St.

 

[jncuse]

Bubble Entering Today ** (Note - I am using the matrix totals from yesterday, as the "rankings" themselves should not have changed from the results -- UT or UNC should have neither went up or down vs other teams on the list. That being said Boise St would have an additional 74 ins, so all the numbers below are inflated).

Out of 97

San Diego St 90
Indiana 81
Texas 70
-----------
UNC 67
Xavier 49

I don't think anybody else has a shot at an large.

 

[jncuse]

So as of now, its 5 team for 3 spots, if you want to discuss the details

San Diego St
Indiana
Texas
UNC
Xavier

If Memphis loses, it becomes those 5 above for 2 spots.
If VCU loses, it becomes 6 teams for 3 spots (add VCU to the list above)

 

[jncuse]

If I was to pick one team that everybody has in that shouldn't feel secure it is West Virginia. Remember from my posts earlier in the OOC season when B12 realy benefited from "NET"flation. There scheduling was no different than others, but they found a way to dominate Q4 just as good as the best, but did much worse in quality games.

I'm starting to ponder whether my list above should be 6 for 4 spots, rather than 5 for 3.

Q1: 6-9
Q2 : 4-4
Q3: 4-0
Q4: 5-0

The Q1 wins on the surface look great. N#8, #10, N#12, A#20. A#49, A#72... but in realty those are projected to be in terms of seeds -- #3, #4, #7, #7, Out, Out. So not as good.

More importantly is losses to a 13-19 ASU team and a 14-20 Colorado team. Those are Q3 losses disguised by NET.

Of course I need to line that up against others. Maybe they deserve it, but its not clear cut.

 

[Ghost]

I really dislike Auburn and Broome.

 

[Ghost]

Refs going all out for Auburn to end this game...

 

[ar inj]

If I was to pick one team that everybody has in that shouldn't feel secure it is West Virginia. Remember from my posts earlier in the OOC season when B12 realy benefited from "NET"flation. There scheduling was no different than others, but they found a way to dominate Q4 just as good as the best, but did much worse in quality games.

I'm starting to ponder whether my list above should be 6 for 4 spots, rather than 5 for 3.

Q1: 6-9
Q2 : 4-4
Q3: 4-0
Q4: 5-0

The Q1 wins on the surface look great. N#8, #10, N#12, A#20. A#49, A#72... but in realty those are projected to be in terms of seeds -- #3, #4, #7, #7, Out, Out. So not as good.

More importantly is losses to a 13-19 ASU team and a 14-20 Colorado team. Those are Q3 losses disguised by NET.

Of course I need to line that up against others. Maybe they deserve it, but its not clear cut.

Interesting on CBS between Big 10 games, Gavitt said not all Quad 1 or Quad 2 games are treated the same. Per chance that will change the makeup of the bracket.
He also indicated, and I am paraphrasing, results get you in and predictive analytics help determine your seed. Any thoughts in reply?

Thanks for doing this again. With SU what it is my interest level is down but this helps drag me back in.

 

[sufan59]

Interesting on CBS between Big 10 games, Gavitt said not all Quad 1 or Quad 2 games are treated the same. Per chance that will change the makeup of the bracket.
He also indicated, and I am paraphrasing, results get you in and predictive analytics help determine your seed. Any thoughts in reply?

Thanks for doing this again. With SU what it is my interest level is down but this helps drag me back in.

Wow thinking of UNC, the part about the results would be a negative. But if they do get in, this could indicate that they may not even go to Dayton with their metrics?

 

[jncuse]

Interesting on CBS between Big 10 games, Gavitt said not all Quad 1 or Quad 2 games are treated the same. Per chance that will change the makeup of the bracket.
He also indicated, and I am paraphrasing, results get you in and predictive analytics help determine your seed. Any thoughts in reply?

Thanks for doing this again. With SU what it is my interest level is down but this helps drag me back in.

#1. I have never heard that bolded philosophy for seeding, but it seems reasonable that is something they are evolving too as they become more reliant on predictive analytics like KP, Bart. NET since it uses margin as a key factor, is also in essence closer to predictive analytics.

"The results get you in" has always been their general motto.

The current consensus seed lines actually align pretty strongly with KP rating. There are a few exceptions though I noted at the tip. If that is indeed what they are doing a few teams to look at on Selection Sunday to test the comment would be Gonzaga, St. John's. Oregon, Missouri.

Gonzaga is a consensus 7 seed per the matrix which aligns with their quality of record. But in KP they are #9, which suggests they should get a higher seed than #7.

St. John's is a consensus 2 seed per the matrix, but their KP is #13. Do they fall to a #3 seed.

Missouri is a consensus 7 seed per the matrix, but their KP is #15. Do they get a higher seed?

Oregon is a consensus 5 seed per the matrix, but their KP is #31, which suggests 8 seed.

I'll try to remember to come back to this point after the selection show, Remind me if you would like.

2) Regarding the comment " Gavitt said not all Quad 1 or Quad 2 games are treated the same." I think that has always been the case... teams on the bubble get their resume wins "Scrubbed" more than the locks -- its not just arguing 6 total Q1 over 4 Q1... they will scrub down those wins when they decide. I also believe they look at something as simple as top half Q1 and bottom half Q1 results.

For West Virginia, to me its the 2 losses that are Q2... that really should be treated as Q3. Nor is Utah a Q1 win, The conference's elevated margin in Q4 games allowed their members not to have any Q3 games all season. And I don't think the B12 is at that level.

I wonder if the committee digs into margin like I did earlier in the year. The NET status of the SEC and even the BIG seems largely deserved, but the NET status of the B12 was largely built off their Q4 margins.

 

[jncuse]

Wow thinking of UNC, the part about the results would be a negative. But if they do get in, this could indicate that they may not even go to Dayton with their metrics?

I think the results part hasn't changed too much from the past.

UNC has a very unique resume this year.
1-12 vs Q1, which is ugly
8-0 vs Q2, which is great

That being said the "SOS" of UNC's Q1 games by themselves was ridiculously difficult 10 of the 13 games were "top half" difficulty, and 7 were extremely high difficulty
- 7 of the 13 games are against teams that will be seeded #1 or #2, and the 2 that were at home were against Duke and Alabama.
- Of the other 6 games, NONE were at HOME.
- UNC only had 2 of its 13 Q1 games at home (Duke and Alabama)

Could they, should they have went 2-11 or 3-10 sure. The losses at Pitt and Wake Forest hurt. But I'm not sure any bubble team is likely to go more than 3-10 against that slate of teams. Things go right maybe 4-9. But then again those teams didn't go 8-0 in Q2 games like UNC.

 

[jncuse]

Comparing quality of Q1 games -- UNC/Indiana. UNC went 1-12 and Indiana went 4-13 in those games But one is much harder than the other when you line then up side vs side based on projected seed.

I broke them down into quarters.

UNC / Indiana

#1 (H) / #2
#1 / #4
#1 / #4
-- / #4

#1 / #4H
#1 / #5H
#2 (H) / #5H
--- / #5

#2 / #6H
@#5 / #6
@#6 / #6H
---- / #7

N#6 / @NIT
@#7 / @NIT
@ NIT / @NIT
@ NIT / @NIT
---- / @NIT

This isn't necessarily an argument for UNC over Indiana. UNC couldn't afford to lose to both Pitt and Wake on the road. But its 1-12 in Q1 is a bit deceptive compared to others.

 

[PoppyHart]

I think the results part hasn't changed too much from the past.

UNC has a very unique resume this year.
1-12 vs Q1, which is ugly
8-0 vs Q2, which is great

That being said the "SOS" of UNC's Q1 games by themselves was ridiculously difficult 10 of the 13 games were "top half" difficulty, and 7 were extremely high difficulty
- 7 of the 13 games are against teams that will be seeded #1 or #2, and the 2 that were at home were against Duke and Alabama.
- Of the other 6 games, NONE were at HOME.
- UNC only had 2 of its 13 Q1 games at home (Duke and Alabama)

Could they, should they have went 2-11 or 3-10 sure. The losses at Pitt and Wake Forest hurt. But I'm not sure any bubble team is likely to go more than 3-10 against that slate of teams. Things go right maybe 4-9. But then again those teams didn't go 8-0 in Q2 games like UNC.

And of there 8 Q2 wins, zero are against tourney teams and 3 are against teams with NETs > 100 (NCSU, SU, ND).

SDSU has proven they can beat Houston & Creighton, potential P5 conference tourney champs.

UNC has proven they can beat UCLA.