Blind Resume: Which Bubble Teams Are Most Deserving of 2021 NCAA Tournament Bid?

Is it truly March Madness if we haven't done a few blind resume comparisons?

These men's college basketball teams, whom the selection committee might also be comparing head-to-head right now, rest squarely on the bubble. Oftentimes, blind resumes intentionally use just a portion of the data to misrepresent a certain team's form—but, there will be no tricks or games here. The purpose of this exercise is to focus upon what the computer numbers have to say by stripping away the team names and proverbial eye tests.

Not every bubble team will be covered, so if you don't find a squad you're looking for, it doesn't necessarily mean we feel it is safely in or definitively out. (Of particular note, Wichita State is smack dab on the bubble, but we couldn't come up with an intriguing comparison for the Shockers.) However, we will hit on more than a dozen teams that have surprisingly similar resumes to others in the mix for at-large bids.

Before diving in, here are the major quadrants that will be mentioned repeatedly:

Q1: home vs. NET top 30, neutral vs. NET top 50, road vs. NET top 75
Q2: home vs. NET 31-75, neutral vs. NET 51-100, road vs. NET 76-135
Q3: home vs. NET 76-160, neutral vs. NET 101-200, road vs. NET 136-240
Q4: home vs. NET 161-353, neutral vs. NET 201-353, road vs. NET 241-353

Team A: 16-11, NET: 26, KenPom: 11, 4-9 vs. Q1, 5-2 vs. Q2, 7-0 vs. Q3/Q4

Team B: 14-12, NET: 34, KenPom: 29, 4-9 vs. Q1, 2-3 vs. Q2, 8-0 vs. Q3/Q4

Team C: 14-10, NET: 37, KenPom: 33, 4-8 vs. Q1, 5-2 vs. Q2, 5-0 vs. Q3/Q4

Team D: 15-11, NET: 65, KenPom: 55, 5-9 vs. Q1, 4-2 vs. Q2, 6-0 vs. Q3/Q4

Since we're starting out with a doozy of comparing four resumes at once, we wanted to at least reduce the difficulty of the guessing game by letting you know these are all Big Ten teams. Now that you know that, we can perhaps clue you in on some of the top wins without giving much away.

Teams B, C, and D all boast a win over projected No. 1 seed Illinois as their greatest accomplishment. Combined with a lack of bad losses for all three teams, that key win almost single-handedly puts them in the field.

Team D also has home wins over Michigan and Ohio State. So not only does it have one more Quadrant 1 win than the others, it has, by far, the most impressive collection of the three best victories.

Team A has the best metrics, but it couldn't buy a win against the Big Ten's top tier. It was swept by Michigan, swept by Illinois, swept by Iowa and lost its only games against Ohio State and Purdue. The 0-8 record in those games has raised major questions about Team A, but it does have road wins over each of Team B, Team C and Team D, plus a home victory over Loyola-Chicago.

All four of these teams are in our projected field, but how would you rank them?

The Reveal

A lot of people have been asking if Team D (Michigan State) is a lock to make the NCAA tournament after its strong finish, and it is. Sparty's NET ranking is unsightly (because its 11 losses were by an average of 16.3 points), but I would dare say they have the most impressive resume of the bunch.

They could get a No. 9 seed, though they would strongly prefer a No. 10. With Big Ten teams projected for two of the No. 1 seeds, any of the conference's teams in the Nos. 8-9 seed range would almost certainly be paired with either Gonzaga or Baylor as a second-round foe.

That's also pertinent information for Team A (Wisconsin), Team B (Maryland) and Team C (Rutgers), each of whom I have in the Nos. 29-39 range on my overall seed list. (That equates to a No. 8- to 10-seed range.)

Maryland is the most bubble vulnerable of the bunch after its season-ending losses to Northwestern and Penn State. But even if the Terrapins lose to Michigan State in their Big Ten tournament opener, the lack of bid thieves in the A-10, Missouri Valley and West Coast conference tournaments means they'll probably still go dancing.

Team E: 14-6, NET: 45, KenPom: 49, 2-2 vs. Q1, 2-2 vs. Q2, 10-2 vs. Q3/Q4, 12-1 at home, 2-5 away from home

Team F: 13-7, NET: 57, KenPom: 59, 1-2 vs. Q1, 5-5 vs. Q2, 7-0 vs. Q3/Q4, 11-2 at home, 2-5 away from home

I have made it a point to not pay any attention to strength of schedule or nonconference SOS as stand-alone data points this season. It's usually a talking point within the selection committee, but I find it hard to believe those folks will penalize teams that couldn't assemble a formidable nonconference schedule during a global pandemic.

Also, as the architect of WarrenNolan.com recently pointed out on Twitter, some vast, baffling differences exist between the old RPI SOS and new NET SOS rankings, and the numbers are generally all over the place.

However, I do still believe road/neutral records are important to the selection committee, and these two bubble teams did not fare well in that department.

At first glance, it probably feels like an easy advantage for Team E. It has the better metrics, and it has two Quadrant 1 wins to Team F's one. However, both of Team E's Quadrant 1 victories barely qualify as such. They were home wins over the No. 27 and No. 28 teams in the NET, and only home wins over the top 30 count among the top tier. If those teams slide just a bit, it's possible Team E could end up at 0-2 vs. Quadrant 1.

Then again, Team F's home win over NET No. 25 Creighton isn't exactly a lock to remain in Quadrant 1, either. If all three of those teams slip to No. 31 or lower, both of these bubble teams will be 0-2 vs. Quadrant 1.

This is why it's always important to look at the actual wins and losses and not just the records against those groups.

The Reveal

The real question is: How much will the committee penalize Team E (Saint Louis) for its bad losses, considering they came in the first two games after the Billikens returned from a COVID-19 pause of more than a month?

Would they have seriously lost at NET No. 201 La Salle if not for that major factor? While we cannot assume any losses would have been wins, there will hopefully be an "if we temporarily remove those two losses suffered under extraneous circumstances, is there any way we would leave this team out?" discussion among the committee.

Team F (Xavier) also endured a couple of COVID-19 pauses, though nothing nearly as long as Saint Louis'. And the Musketeers didn't suffer their bad losses immediately after any of their pauses. They simply couldn't win road games against St. John's, Providence, Georgetown or Marquette over the final three weeks of the regular season.

As of Tuesday morning, I have Xavier as my last team in and Saint Louis as my third team out. But if Xavier loses to Butler on Wednesday, a swap may be in order.

Team G: 19-6, NET: 35, KenPom: 43, 2-4 vs. Q1, 7-0 vs. Q2, 5-2 vs. Q3, 5-0 vs. Q4

Team H: 16-9, NET: 39, KenPom: 31, 2-8 vs. Q1, 7-0 vs. Q2, 4-1 vs. Q3, 3-0 vs. Q4

Team I: 15-8, NET: 38, KenPom: 32, 2-6 vs. Q1, 6-0 vs. Q2, 4-2 vs. Q3, 3-0 vs. Q4

Let's go one step further within the Quadrant 1 records to display the complete lack of separation between these three teams.

If you split it into Quadrant 1A and Quadrant 1B, in which Quadrant 1A is home games against NET top 15, neutral games against NET top 25 and road games against NET top 40, these teams are a collective 0-13 against Quadrant 1A. In other words, even their most impressive wins aren't that great.

Teams H and I each scored a home win over NET No. 22 Florida State. Team G's biggest accomplishment was a home win over also-slightly-on-the-bubble St. Bonaventure. And they suffered a combined five home losses against Quadrant 3. (Team H has a slight leg up on Team G and Team I since it only has one of those bad losses.)

But the 20-0 combined record against Quadrant 2 is the saving grace for this trio.

We talk ad nauseam about Quadrant 1 wins and Quadrant 3/4 losses, and then Quadrant 2—games you should win if you're a tournament-caliber team, but games you wouldn't get drastically penalized for losing—is just kind of there, unmentioned unless there's an outlier record.

Because these teams more than held serve against that tier of opponents, don't be surprised if all three land on the No. 10 seed line.

The Reveal

We probably gave away the identities of Teams H (North Carolina) and I (Georgia Tech) with the Florida State note, but it's still intriguing to see how tight the race is between those ACC teams. Georgia Tech's bad losses (vs. Mercer, vs. Georgia State) both happened way back in November. North Carolina's bad loss (vs. Marquette) turned out to be an ill-advised, last-second add-on in late February.

Team G is VCU, and it could remove itself from any bubble talk by beating St. Bonaventure in the A-10 championship on Saturday. Of the two teams in that game, though, the Rams are much more likely to fall into the bubble conversation with a loss, so we wanted to preemptively note that they should be fine.

The bonus team not explicitly outlined above is Drake. The Bulldogs are also undefeated against Quadrant 2 (5-0) and have a pair of Quadrant 3 losses (at Bradley, at Valparaiso). While they only have one Quadrant 1 victory, at least that home win over Loyola-Chicago falls firmly into the Quadrant 1A bucket. They also got that great win despite only three chances (all against the Ramblers) against the top Quadrant.

Most of us have Drake projected for a play-in game in an implied "Would be OK for now, but things could go south if there are bid thieves" situation. But if VCU, North Carolina and Georgia Tech are all somewhat comfortably in the field, it wouldn't be all that shocking if Drake gets in with a little room to spare, avoiding the play-in games altogether.

Team J: 17-5, NET: 50, KenPom: 61, 2-3 vs. Q1, 1-2 vs. Q2, 13-0 vs. Q3/Q4

Team K: 18-7, NET: 43, KenPom: 57, 2-4 vs. Q1, 2-2 vs. Q2, 13-1 vs. Q3/Q4

Team L: 18-7, NET: 48, KenPom: 45, 2-4 vs. Q1, 1-1 vs. Q2, 14-2 vs. Q3/Q4

As we did with the Big Ten's bubble teams, let's cut right to the chase and let you know these are the three Mountain West teams straddling the tournament cut line.

The consensus is that Boise State and Colorado State are barely in and that Utah State is barely out. But which of these resumes belongs to which of those teams? And should we agree with that hierarchy of these three teams?

From a purely head-to-head perspective, yeah, it makes sense. Boise State went 3-1 with a sweep of Utah State, while Colorado State split both of those series.

However, factor in the games played against the MWC's top dog (San Diego State) and the playing field is evened in a hurry. Utah State swept the Aztecs, and Boise State was swept by them. Colorado State, again, split that series. Thus, all three of these teams went 3-3 against the rest of the Mountain West's top tier.

Hence the inability to find any separation between them.

What happened outside those six games, though?

Team J went 14-2 and lost its only other games played against the top two Quadrants. One of those losses (53-33 at Saint Mary's) was particularly ugly. But Team J doesn't have any terrible losses, which arguably makes it the best resume of the bunch.

Team K was the only one to get a bonus quality win, and it was a great one at NET No. 19 BYU. Team L also got a shot against the Cougars, but it lost at home by three. But while Team K was swept at Nevada, Team L won both of its home games against the Wolf Pack. And Team K's bad loss (vs. Fresno State) really stands out as a Quadrant 4 misstep. Team L's two bad losses (at UNLV; South Dakota State on a neutral court) weren't great, but at least they weren't Quadrant 4 results.

The Reveal

The final order will boil down to the conference tournament. Team K (Boise State) opens with the biggest risk/reward game against Nevada. Of these three teams, the Broncos are most likely to lose right away. They're also the team that could improve its resume a bit in the quarterfinals.

Assuming the other half of the bracket plays to form, it'll be Team J (Colorado State) vs. Team L (Utah State) in the semifinals. While I'm unwilling to declare it as either a "win and you're in" or a "lose and you're out" game, there's no question the winner will move/stay ahead of the loser in the overall seed pecking order.

I have Colorado State and Utah State projected for play-in games, with Boise State as my first team out, but there's a good chance I'm over-penalizing the Broncos for the bad loss and under-rewarding them for that great road win over BYU. But if Boise beats Nevada on Thursday night, I have every intention of vaulting the Broncos ahead of the bubble team that fails (or bubble teams that fail) to reach the MWC championship.

Team M: 15-10, NET: 53, KenPom: 50, 3-4 vs. Q1, 5-4 vs. Q2, 7-2 vs. Q3/Q4

Team N: 13-12, NET: 58, KenPom: 53, 3-7 vs. Q1, 3-4 vs. Q2, 7-1 vs. Q3/Q4

As previously mentioned, we often barely notice Quadrant 2 records unless they stand out against the crowd.

For the likes of VCU, North Carolina, Georgia Tech and Drake, they stood out in a good way.

For these two teams, not so much.

Both Team M and Team N have three Quadrant 1 wins. However, the best of the bunch was Team N's road win over Connecticut during the portion of the year in which Huskies star James Bouknight was out with an elbow injury. Neither one has a win over a team we are currently projecting for a No. 5 seed or better, which makes the stockpiles of Quadrant 2 losses tougher to stomach.

Each team has five losses against teams not projected to make the tournament. Team M's came at Dayton, at Georgia, at Vanderbilt, vs. Mississippi State and vs. Georgia, while Team N had missteps at St. John's, at Georgetown, at Rhode Island, at Butler and vs. Providence. None of those losses was individually dreadful, but at a certain point, there's a straw that pops the team's bubble.

Does either of these teams deserve to get in? If there's room for just one spot, who gets it?

The Reveal

Team M is Ole Miss, which didn't begin to receive bracketology love until a couple of weeks ago. The Rebels started out 8-8 with no strong wins before finishing pretty strong with a sweep of Missouri and a home victory over Tennessee. They've gained ground in a hurry, though suffering two of those five bad losses in late February has kept them from getting over the hump.

Team N is Seton Hall, which has been trending in the opposite direction for a while. The Pirates were 9-5 in mid-January with road wins over Xavier, Marquette and Penn State, which looked a whole lot better then than they do now. In addition to those wins losing luster, Seton Hall lost seven of its final 11 games and acquired three of the aforementioned bad losses during the home stretch.

I currently have both teams out with Seton Hall slightly ahead, but I also have little doubt there's an inertia effect in play there. Anyone just now putting together their first bracket projection of the season would probably side with the Rebels over the Pirates.

Team O: 15-8, NET: 49, KenPom: 51, 1-6 vs. Q1, 4-1 vs. Q2, 10-1 vs. Q3/Q4

Team P: 13-6, NET: 51, KenPom: 52, 1-5 vs. Q1, 6-0 vs. Q2, 6-1 vs. Q3/Q4

We're saving my favorite one for last. And by "favorite," I mean it's the one that is puzzling me.

From a bird's-eye view, there's basically no difference between these resumes. They're nearly identical in both NET and KenPom, and they only have one Quadrant 1 win (neither of which was impressive, for the record) and one bad loss each.

Yet for some reason, in the Monday evening Bracket Matrix refresh, Team P was a projected tournament team in 132 of 133 brackets, much closer to a No. 10 seed than a No. 12 seed, and Team O was left out of the projected field, only appearing in 37 brackets.

From an in-the-weeds perspective, I would dare say Team O looks a little better than Team P.

The former has home wins over projected tournament teams Clemson, North Carolina and Virginia Tech, as well as a season sweep of sort-of-on-the-bubble NC State. Though Team O does have one more non-Q1 loss than Team P, neither of those bad losses (swept by Pittsburgh) was all that terrible.

Team P only has two wins over projected at-large teams (home games against Virginia Tech and Georgia Tech), and its bad loss (at Miami) was substantially worse than Team O's missteps. However, Team P swept Duke and won a home game against Kentucky, and I fear we are unintentionally putting too much stock in those outcomes against floundering name-brand programs.

The Reveal

Team O is annual bracketology headache Syracuse, and Team P is Louisville. While I don't necessarily think Syracuse should be in the field, I do think Louisville is in a little more danger than people realize.

Both teams will be going for a much-needed third win against a single foe in the ACC tournament. Syracuse draws NC State in the No. 8 vs. No. 9 game in the early slate, while Louisville will face Duke in the evening.

As things currently stand, Louisville should perhaps be ahead of Syracuse. But the gap isn't that wide. If Syracuse wins and Louisville loses, things will get very interesting in the ACC. And heaven knows the selection committee loves to throw us Orange curveballs.

Kerry Miller covers men's college basketball and college football for Bleacher Report. You can follow him on Twitter: @kerrancejames. All data is current through the start of play on Tuesday. Stats courtesy of KenPom.com, NCAA.com, Sports Reference and Bracket Matrix unless otherwise noted.