Drake (one of my seven lower mid-majors picks) won a first-round game, while UCSD and UNCW beat the spread. High Point and Yale each came within two points of beating the spread, but Lipscomb and Bryant were beaten soundly. With second-round losses by Drake and McNeese, no lower mid-majors advanced to the Sweet 16.
The prevailing opinion was that we wouldn’t see a mid-major make a Loyola—like run to the Sweet 16 and Final Four. If one did, Drake was the likely candidate.
By Saturday, all lower mid-majors were out of contention. Three upper-mid majors remained alive as we entered Sunday’s play–Colorado State (+7.5 vs. Maryland), St. Mary’s (+5.5 vs. Alabama), and New Mexico (+7.5 vs. Michigan State). By Saturday evening, none was left.
The Gaels pressed the Tide, but Alabama prevailed. Meanwhile, the Rams nearly pulled a monumental upset–ahead of the Terrapins by one with under ten seconds left but losing on Queen’s bank shot at the buzzer. New Mexico, another team from the surprising Mountain West, led the Spartans by two at the half but couldn’t sustain their play after the halftime break.
As for my picks, here’s a rundown of what I predicted and what transpired.
Happy Bulldogs (photo courtesy KSL)
PREDICTED: #11 Drake vs. #6 Missouri: The Bulldogs could win outright and have an excellent opportunity to beat the spread. OUTCOME: Drake +6.5 with a 27% chance of winning. Drake won 67-57. Drake was composed, while Mizzou looked inept at the game’s end.
PREDICTED: #12 University of California, San Diego vs. #5 Michigan. I’m a big fan of UCSD, the club with the lowest NET rating (#35), which explains why it also had the highest chance of winning per ESPN, even though it is matched up with Michigan, the Big 10 tournament champ. The problem is that UCSD is guard- and long-range shooting-oriented, and I don’t see how they will handle the Wolverines’ length, not to speak of their speed. OUTCOME: UCSD +3.5, 33% chance of winning. Michigan won by three, 68-65, and UCSD covered the spread.
The Tritons almost scored a big upset, tying the game late and having three players in double figures (McGhie, Gray, and Kapic). They would have won the game if Aniwaniwa Tait-Jones, the Big West POY, had a big game. He didn’t with seven points, four rebounds, and no assists.
PREDICTED: #14 University of North Carolina Wilmington vs. #3 Texas Tech. I like how the Seahawks play, but the load is primarily in the hands of Newby (G) and McGriff (F), and I don’t know if they have enough to get the team a W. OUTCOME: UNCW +14.5, 8% chance of winning. This was one of those classic David vs. Goliath games where the mid-major plays the first half well and then runs out of gas late. Newby and McGriff had 16 points between them on 6-20 shooting. Still, UNCW covered the spread, losing by ten, 82-75, in a +14.5 spread.
PREDICTED: #13 Yale vs. #4 Texas A & M. Yale, +7.5, 22% chance of winning. Bulldogs could spring a surprise down the stretch if they keep the score close. For that to happen, John Poulakidas must have a strong game. OUTCOME: Yale played well, but A&M was too strong inside, even though (as I had hoped and predicted) John Poulakidas played well (23 points).
The Aggies covered the spread only by 1.5 points, 80-71.
PREDICTED: #13 High Point vs. #4 Purdue. HPU +10.5, 18% chance of winning. Those unfamiliar with High Point don’t realize this is an excellent team, including inside size in the person of 7-foot Juslin Bodo Bodo. Purdue has fallen to lower mid-majors (St. Peter’s and Fairleigh Dickinson), so why not again? OUTCOME: The Panthers rely on balanced scoring, but only two players scored in double figures against the Boilers, and big man Bodo Bodo had a modest night (8 points, six rebounds).
Purdue covered the spread by only 1.5 points, 75-63.
PREDICTED: #14 Lipscomb vs. #3 Iowa State, Lipscomb +13.5, 8% chance of winning. I’m concerned about the impact of ISU losing one of its starting guards, Keshon Gilbert (14 PPG, four APG, and 50% shooting from the field). Can LU win? I think it will be a close game until a late ISU burst. OUTCOME: The Cyclones had no difficulty in this one, getting out to a quick first-half lead and never being threatened, winning by 27, 82-55, and beating the spread easily.
Not enough Pinzon (24) to beat the Spartans (photo courtesy Lansing State Journal)
PREDICTED #15 Bryant vs. #2 Michigan State, Bryant +18.5, 6% chance of winning. Bryant seems out of its league against the Big Ten Spartans, an opponent with size, good ballhandling, and (most importantly) uber-bench strength. MSU has too many bodies and tournament experience to be upset. OUTCOME: The Spartans’ depth told the tale in this one. Bryant kept it close (it was only a ten-point deficit halfway through the second half) until it ran out of gas, and MSU eventually won by 25 points, beating the spread by 6.5 points. Even though Rafael Pinzon had 21 points, he didn’t have a particularly good night (9-26 shooting).
In addition to my lower-mid major picks, I picked eight upper mid-majors to surprise. Four did, four didn’t, and Utah State, Grand Canyon, and Akron were outclassed among those who didn’t.
Winners (4): McNeese beat Clemson by 2, St. Mary’s beat Vanderbilt by 3, New Mexico beat Marquette by 9, and Colorado St beat Memphis by 8.
Losers (4): VCU lost by 9 to BYU, Utah State lost by 25 to UCLA, Grand Canyon lost by 32 to Maryland, and Akron lost by 28 to Arizona.
Overall Grade for 2025
Keep in mind that betting on lower mid-majors is a longshot wager. One of my seven picks did the trick this year, and four others beat or nearly beat the spread. That’s 5 out of 7, which I’ll take any year, especially this one, because I felt it was a slim pickin’ season. Conversely, two of my picks (from the lower tier of the low mid-major ranks) were beaten soundly (Bryant, America East, Lipscomb, Atlantic Sun). That’s the risk of picking teams from conferences with limited competition.
The flip side of that coin (and it happens every year) is that I swing and miss on a team that exceeds expectations. This year, McNeese (Southland) was that team.
How would I grade myself? B- C+
See you next January….
_________________
Statistics courtesy ESPN.
I evaluate Lower Mid-Major conferences/teams before the conference season begins and later around conference tournament time. The January evaluation is based on pre-conference performance, primarily how teams perform against Upper Mid-Major and Major teams. The subsequent review, published here, is based on how teams perform in their respective conferences (regular season and tournament).
Let me comment on my screening process for those reading my annual analysis for the first time. I don’t consider teams that play in eight Upper Mid-Major conferences, which I see as the Atlantic 10, American, Conference USA, Mid-American, Mountain West, Sun Belt, Western Athletic, and West Coast. Instead, I focus on 18 Lower Mid-Major conferences, which I see as the Atlantic Sun, America East, Big Sky, Big South, Big West, Coastal Athletic, Horizon, Ivy, Mid-Atlantic Athletic (MAAC), Mid-Eastern Athletic (MEAC), Missouri Valley, Northeast, Ohio Valley, Patriot, Southwest Athletic (SWAC), Southern, Southland, and Summit.
