The Agony of the Bubble: Examining the Biggest Snubs from the 2025 NCAA Men’s Tournament
Selection Sunday. A day of jubilation for 68 teams, a day where dreams materialize and months of hard work culminate in the ultimate opportunity – a chance to compete for the national championship. Confetti rains down, cheers erupt, and the brackets are revealed, setting the stage for the annual spectacle that is March Madness. However, lurking in the shadows of this celebration is a profound sense of disappointment for numerous other programs, teams that poured their heart and soul into the season, only to be left on the outside looking in. These are the bubble teams, the squads on the fringes, the ones whose fates are debated endlessly in the lead-up to the tournament.
Every year, there are teams who build compelling resumes, stacking up quality wins and navigating the treacherous landscape of college basketball with resilience and determination. They cling to hope, believing their body of work is worthy of an at-large bid. Yet, the NCAA Tournament Selection Committee, tasked with the unenviable job of choosing the most deserving teams, often makes decisions that leave these bubble squads reeling, their aspirations shattered. Perhaps their case wasn’t quite strong enough, or maybe the limited number of spots simply couldn’t accommodate them all.
The 2025 NCAA Men’s Tournament selection process was no different. While the promise of thrilling matchups and potential Cinderella stories is always alluring, it doesn’t erase the sting felt by those teams who feel they were unjustly excluded. The committee’s choices always spark debate, and this year was no exception, particularly concerning the inclusion of North Carolina, a team that many felt underperformed relative to its potential and pedigree.
So, who were the teams left lamenting their exclusion from the Big Dance in 2025? Which programs had a legitimate gripe with the committee’s final selections? Here’s a closer look at some of the biggest snubs from the tournament:
West Virginia Mountaineers: The most shocking omission of all, the Mountaineers were widely projected to make the tournament field. First-year coach Darian DeVries guided his team to an impressive start, racking up some marquee victories that seemed to solidify their standing. However, a late-season slump, culminating in an early exit from the Big 12 tournament against Colorado, ultimately proved to be their undoing.
Despite the late struggles, West Virginia’s resume was arguably worthy of inclusion. They secured significant wins against Gonzaga, Arizona, Kansas, and Iowa State, all of whom were ranked among the top 20 in the NET rankings. Their 6-10 record in Quad 1 games, a testament to their ability to compete against elite competition, was comparable to many other bubble teams. Furthermore, their combined record in Quad 2 and Quad 3 games (10-13) was solid. The Mountaineers boasted more Quad 1 wins than a staggering 13 at-large teams selected for the tournament. The committee clearly valued other factors more highly, leaving West Virginia on the outside looking in.
Boise State Broncos: The Broncos made a valiant late-season push, winning nine of their last 11 regular-season games and reaching the Mountain West tournament final. Despite this impressive surge, it wasn’t enough to earn them an at-large bid. Boise State finished with an exceptional 24-win season, exceeding the win total of some teams that made the First Four in previous years.
The Broncos secured victories against tournament-bound teams such as Utah State and New Mexico, as well as a notable win against Clemson in the regular season. They followed this up with tournament wins against San Diego State and New Mexico before ultimately falling to Colorado State in the conference tournament final. Boise State posted an 8-8 record in Quad 1 and 2 games, demonstrating their ability to compete with the tournament field.
The major detractor in Boise State’s resume were a couple of Quad 3 and Quad 4 losses, which the committee apparently weighed heavily. Despite these losses occurring earlier in the season, before their late-season resurgence, the committee ultimately deemed them too damaging to overlook.
Indiana Hoosiers: It was a disappointing end to Mike Woodson’s tenure at Indiana, as the Hoosiers failed to secure a March Madness appearance in his final season in Bloomington. After a lackluster start that saw them sitting at 14-10, the Hoosiers revived their season with impressive wins over Michigan State and Purdue. However, they needed a strong showing at the Big Ten tournament to solidify their chances, but a loss to Oregon in their first game in Indianapolis dashed those hopes.
Indiana had a legitimate case to feel slighted, particularly in comparison to North Carolina’s selection. While the Hoosiers had a poor 4-13 record in Quad 1 games, they avoided any disastrous losses, posting a perfect 15-0 record in Quad 2-4 games. This was in stark contrast to North Carolina, who struggled to capitalize on Quad 1 opportunities and suffered a couple of questionable losses. Indiana can argue that if North Carolina wasn’t severely penalized for failing to win Quad 1 games, then the same standard should have been applied to them.
Ohio State Buckeyes: Ohio State presented a similar case to Texas, a team that ultimately received an at-large bid. The key difference, however, was that the Longhorns got in while the Buckeyes were left out, likely due to the Buckeyes’ bad losses despite accumulating some notable wins throughout the season.
The Buckeyes finished the season with a 17-15 record, securing victories against Texas, Kentucky, Purdue, and Maryland. They also boasted a No. 41 NET ranking, a respectable position considering that some teams ranked lower than them were selected for the tournament.
While their 6-11 Quad 1 record wasn’t ideal, particularly given the number of opportunities they had, their 3-4 Quad 2 record wasn’t terrible. Historically, six Quad 1 wins have been a benchmark for teams in power conferences seeking at-large bids. The committee ultimately decided that Ohio State’s blemishes were too significant to ignore.
UC Irvine Anteaters: The Anteaters came agonizingly close to securing an automatic bid from the Big West tournament before UC San Diego ultimately prevailed. Even without the automatic bid, Russell Turner’s team had a legitimate argument to give the Big West two teams in the field for the first time since 2005.
At 28-6, UC Irvine was tied for the eighth-most victories in Division I this season and tied the mark for the most wins by a team to miss the tournament. The NET ranking (No. 62) was the main factor that hurt the Anteaters. Their 1-1 Quad 1 record also didn’t outweigh their three Quad 3 losses. While UC Irvine’s impressive win total and overall record suggested they were worthy of an at-large spot, the committee opted to leave the Big West with only one representative.
Dayton Flyers: A team that largely flew under the radar, Dayton quietly assembled a solid resume. The Flyers finished third in the Atlantic 10 and had a 3-3 mark in Quad 1 games, including victories over Connecticut and Marquette. They also defeated Atlantic 10 conference champion Virginia Commonwealth on the road.
However, Dayton’s 2-6 Quad 2 record and a Quad 3 loss to Massachusetts in early January likely proved to be too damaging to overcome. While they had some impressive wins, their inconsistencies in other quadrants ultimately prevented them from earning an at-large bid.
The NCAA Tournament is always a captivating event, but the selection process is often filled with heartbreak and controversy. While the 68 teams chosen have earned their spot, the stories of the snubs serve as a reminder of the fine line between making the tournament and being left behind, and the often subjective nature of the selection process. The debate over who was in and who was out will continue long after the final buzzer sounds in April, fueling the passion and intensity that makes college basketball so captivating.
