Quadrant 1 wins ain’t everything. This is a crucial — and eminently forgettable — fact. No other component of team sheets is discussed as often, or accorded as much rhetorical importance. It is frequently the only thing broadcasters mention about a team’s resume, the only portion of the team sheet a mid-timeout bubble-discussion chyron flashes on the screen.
A case in point: During Texas’s loss to Tennessee Friday, when the time came to discuss Texas’s status on Joe Lunardi’s bubble, Jay Bilas argued that the Longhorns’ quality wins were all you really needed to note about their resume, relative to North Carolina or Xavier; Dan Schulman dutifully ticked off the quality teams Texas had beaten this season, noting their 7-10 Q1 record. “I rest my case,” Bilas responded. There was no meaningful mention of any other aspect of any of the teams’ cases, an acknowledgement that not all Q1 wins and losses are equal, that North Carolina had gone 8-0 against Q2 (Texas is 3-4) and boasted a top-five nonconference schedule. There was none of that. Quadrant 1 began, and ended, the discussion.
This collective obsession makes sense — up to a point. (We certainly focus on it plenty, too.) The committee clearly cares about Q1 performance. They should! Beating good teams is how you, you know, prove you’re a good team.
But teams on the bubble are different. They’re on the bubble! They’re sort of mediocre! The conversation is more nuanced. You’re not comparing conference champions vying for No. 2 seeds; you’re trying to select from a mass of disparate flaws. What matters more: A couple of important victories? The specific details of those victories (i.e.: are they in the top or bottom half of quadrant 1)? Solid performance against the middle of the pack? Bad losses? Schedule strength? NET? The mesh of predictive and records metrics that vary from model to model?
If all we had to do to predict selection committee behavior every year was look at wins at the top end of the team sheet, this whole process would be very easy. But it’s not. It’s complicated. And it’s why, despite all the pundit-class dismissiveness about their performance in one undeniably important segment of their schedule, North Carolina was still in so many mock brackets entering Friday. The whole team sheet counts.
Having said all that: If the choice comes down to North Carolina and Texas, we’d put Texas in the field. (We are not sure this premise is even valid. Both teams could end up getting in, and the battle for the last spot might come down to Indiana and Xavier.) The Longhorns took a bunch of losses and scuffled throughout a brutal SEC campaign, but they have done some quality work along the way. Heck: During the first half of North Carolina’s eventually competitive loss to a Cooper Flagg- and Maliq Brown-less Duke, we were prepared to go all the way and make an eye test argument. Yes, the eye test! Texas looked better — more cohesive, more balanced, more talented. North Carolina looked like it didn’t care. And we hate the eye test!
Then North Carolina battled back and nearly (and frankly should have, but for a lane violation by Jae’Lyn Withers, the poor kid) knocked off the (yes, depleted) No. 1 team in the country, and looked like a pretty darn good team in the process. (Turns out, when Elliot Cadeau isn’t a mess and at least one big shows up to play, this is not a bad outfit.)
The core argument for the Tar Heels came back to the fore in that final 20 minutes: This is a decent squad that has played a ton of really good ones. It has habitually failed to get over the hump. That is why it is on the bubble. But does that mean it definitely isn’t one of the best 37 at-large candidates? Not necessarily.
Your mileage may vary. Truly. That’s the real point here: This is all open to interpretation. It’s not open-and-shut. Preferring Texas because of quadrant 1 wins is not as obvious or as simple or as conversation-ending as many acted Friday. (And, yes, we are already bracing for the TV outrage Sunday night if Xavier or UNC makes the field over the Longhorns. It will not be reasonable. It will be vitriolic.)
There’s a reason UT is on the cut line. There is a reason they are one spot above or one spot below the Tar Heels (or Xavier): There is more to bubble life than quadrant 1 wins.
