These 10 teams have most at stake in March Madness bracketology

The deliberations among the Men’s NCAA Tournament selection committee remain mostly private each year, with only a few interviews done by its chair each year on Selection Sunday serving as the only official rationale for who’s in, who’s out and where every team is seeded for March Madness.

The 2026 NCAA Tournament is shaping up to be a fascinating bracket, as season-long favorites appear headed for a No. 1 seed and a particularly soft bubble filled with iffy resumes comes into focus ahead of Selection Sunday. Like last season, the selection committee will have seven metrics based on computer models and formulas listed on its team sheets and how each is weighed can be a point of contention that has lasting impact given the importance NCAA tournament performance has on the overall perception of a program.

Each ranking or rating is separated into two distinct categories — predictive metrics and results-based metrics. The NCAA Evaluation Tool (NET), KenPom, ESPN’s BPI and the Torvik rankings are considered predictive rankings that measure how good a team is based on its offensive and defensive efficiency, adjusted for opponent strength and location. The KPI, ESPN’s Strength of Record (SOR) and Wins Above Bubble (WAB) are results-based rankings that judge how hard it was for a team to attain its résumé.

For many teams, the two types of ratings largely converge by the end of the regular season. For others, however, there can be a wide swath of outcomes based on how a game was played and whether it was won or lost. These are the schools from major and mid-major conferences that often inspire the most robust conversation and debate among committee members, either over their selection into the NCAA tournament field as an at-large bid and/or their potential seeding.

Here are 10 teams with the most at stake heading into Selection Sunday based on their polarizing rankings among the metrics used by the NCAA Tournament selection committee:

MARCH MADNESS EXPANSION: Why it would punish Cinderellas: ‘Not broken’ — yet

March Madness 2026: NCAA tournament metrics’ most polarizing teams

Records reflect games played on March 12. NET and WAB rankings reflect games played on March 11.

The RedHawks’ undefeated run through the regular season is one of the most compelling stories heading into this year’s March Madness, in part because of the uncertainty about what the NCAA Tournament selection committee might do if Miami (Ohio) didn’t win the Mid-American Conference tournament and the league’s automatic bid. Well, that discussion is now reality after Miami’s stunning loss to UMass in the MAC tournament quarterfinals on Thursday.

While the RedHawks’ predictive metrics are that of a team from a one-bid league, their results-based numbers suggest they’re deserving of an at-large bid into the bracket despite not playing a quadrant one game this season. The selection committee’s decision here is likely to shape the larger narrative surrounding the mid-major selection process on Selection Sunday and mid-major scheduling moving forward.

Perhaps no team could potentially benefit from this year’s soft bubble like the Tigers, who took another step toward securing an at-large bid by beating Mississippi State to open the SEC Tournament. Auburn’s late-season swoon put it in jeopardy of missing the NCAA Tournament and then former coach Bruce Pearl brought a national spotlight when he recently argued the Tigers were more deserving of a March Madness at-large bid than Miami (Ohio). Steven Pearl’s hiring as coach will get even more uncomfortable should Auburn complete this collapse and not hear its name called on Selection Sunday.

The Tar Heels are going dancing for the second year in a row under coach Hubert Davis, but their seeding on Selection Sunday bears watching. The results-based metrics suggest North Carolina could potentially warrant a top-four seed, especially if it were to reel off a couple more quality wins at the ACC tournament. But predictive metrics like KenPom and ESPN’s BPI currently have UNC hovering around the top 30, which would be more in line with earning a No. 7 or No. 8 seed. How the NCAA tournament selection committee views that gap could affect the Tar Heels’ odds of advancing and Davis felt pressure after last season’s first-round exit from the NCAA Tournament.

The Cardinals could be a quandary to seed, with a wider range of metrics than most top 25 teams. Louisville doesn’t have a bad loss on its resumé but it also had just four wins over teams currently projected to make the NCAA Tournament field during the regular season. Its best win is over Kentucky (NET: 27) at home more than four months ago. However, three of the four predictive metrics used by the selection committee – including the NET – have Louisville projected as a top-15 team. This seed line will be hard to project on Selection Sunday.

The Hawkeyes are lucky a lot of bubble teams lost this week or else their quick exit from the Big Ten tournament against Ohio State on Thursday might make the next couple days more nerve-wracking. Iowa will enter the 2026 NCAA Tournament having lost four of its past five games and seven of its previous 10 games, including road setbacks to conference doormats Maryland and Penn State. Its seeding profile was already going to be a challenge for the selection committee and the Hawkeyes’ recent issues could leave them with a lower seed than expected despite predictive metrics mostly inside the top 25.

UCF (21-10)

The Knights seemed safely in the field for most of February (and probably still get into the field after a dramatic comeback win in overtime against Cincinnati on Wednesday at the Big 12 tournament). But UCF’s seed line could test the NCAA Tournament selection committee because its predictive metrics have lagged behind its results-based rankings all season long. UCF’s 10-9 record in quad one and two games this season compares favorably with other teams competing for the last at large bids, but the Knights remain outside the top 50 in the KenPom and Torvik rankings after a three-game losing skid to Baylor, Oklahoma State and West Virginia to close the regular season.

There could be a fascinating debate in the selection committee room revolving around the Longhorns, Missouri and Oklahoma of the SEC. Texas has the best NET, KenPom and BPI rating among the three thanks to its top-20 offense, but enters Selection Sunday with losses in five of its past six games after a first-round setback to Ole Miss on Wednesday at the SEC tournament. Oklahoma’s five-game winning streak entering Thursday included wins over Missouri and Texas. Missouri, meanwhile, leads in every results-based metric, which is why the Tigers’ spot in the field feels more secure than Texas or Oklahoma. The Longhorns have notable wins over Alabama and Vanderbilt in January, a 2-1 record this season against Missouri and Oklahoma, and several blowouts early to boost their predictive metrics. But they’ve also got a quad three loss on their resume, something neither Missouri nor Oklahoma have on theirs.

Coach Wes Miller entered his fifth season leading the Bearcats mentioned on hot seat lists and his departure seemed a foregone conclusion once Cincinnati began this season poorly. A surge in recent weeks, including wins over BYU and Kansas, boosted the Bearcats’ predictive metrics to that of a bubble team. Their results-based metrics still lag, however, with a quad four loss to Eastern Michigan in November looming particularly large now that they lost Wednesday’s Big 12 tournament game to UCF. This year’s soft bubble offers a glimmer of hope ahead of Selection Sunday, which could well determine Miller’s future.

The Cardinal’s metrics aren’t going to help them in the bubble conversation ahead of Selection Sunday, especially after their loss to Pittsburgh in the opening round of the ACC tournament. Stanford is outside the top 60 in predictive metrics and outside the 50 in results-based rankings, but a closer look at their resume explains why they will be considered by the selection committee. The Cardinal have a 9-8 record in quad one and quad two games. Most of their competition for the final at large spots have better metrics but don’t have an above .500 mark against the best teams on the schedule like Stanford.

VCU (24-7)

If the Rams can’t secure the Atlantic-10 Conference’s automatic NCAA Tournament berth, their at-large candidacy could become a talking point on Selection Sunday. They certainly don’t want to risk losing Friday’s A-10 Conference tournament quarterfinal matchup. VCU’s predictive metrics lag behind its results-based metrics because its only loss in the past two months occurred on the road against league leader Saint Louis. But the Rams’ best wins in non conference play were over Virginia Tech and South Florida. VCU’s latest trip to March Madness could be decided by how tough the selection committee perceives the rest of the A-10 to be this season.

This article originally appeared on USA TODAY: NCAA bracketology 2026: Most polarizing teams by March Madness metrics

Read the full article here