Indiana and Nebraska Lead Six Major Conference Basketball Teams Who Have Collapsed in 2019
By Jason Lisk
The Big Ten is loaded this year, and that gauntlet can take its toll on some teams. A couple of teams who entered January as serious tournament hopefuls have gone through some massive slumps, and because of the consistently tough schedules, are now in severe danger. Indiana and Nebraska lead a group of six teams who looked like they were heading for the NCAA Tournament in early January, but now have fallen on hard times.
Indiana Hoosiers (13-11)
The Indiana Hoosiers were at 12-2 on January 3rd after beating Illinois to go to 3-0 in the Big Ten. Those early wins included a destruction of Marquette and a win over Louisville, two teams in the Top 16 when the Selection Committee released their early reveal.
The young Hoosiers, though, have really struggled with consistency and shooting in conference play. They have now lost 9 of their last 10 games. Seven of those losses have come against teams that are likely to be in the NCAA Tournament field. I don’t know what’s more surprising, that they’ve lost 9 of 10 or that the only win was at Michigan State.
NCAA Prognosis: On life support. The next five games are against possible tournament teams, which represents hazard but also opportunity. The game at Minnesota this Saturday is a must-win. If they can get to 17-14 by winning more than half of the remaining games, they will be squarely in the bubble discussion, thanks to their big wins over Michigan State, Marquette, and Louisville. But that’s not an easy task because they will likely be an underdog in each of the next five games.
Nebraska Cornhuskers (14-11)
Nebraska’s beat Indiana over a month ago. After that game, they sat at 13-4, with quality wins at Clemson and Indiana, and against Seton Hall and Creighton. They sat at 11th in the Ken Pomeroy efficiency rankings after that Indiana win. They looked certain to be in the NCAA field, unless they collapsed.
But over the rest of January and half of February, they had seven straight losses, including losses at both Rutgers and Illinois. That finally ended Wednesday night, with a one-point home win over Minnesota when James Palmer hit two free throws with 1.1 seconds left, in what was a must-win. But the Cornhuskers are still only 4-10 in conference play.
NCAA Prognosis: The door is still open, but they must also win the next two games as well at home against Northwestern and then at Penn State. If they do that, then a split of the four-game tough closing stretch (vs. Purdue, at Michigan and Michigan State, vs. Iowa) would put them on the favorable side of the bubble. But that would require them to play much better than they have played in the last month.
Oklahoma Sooners (15-10)
Last year, the Oklahoma Sooners bolted out of the gate with Trae Young and were the talk of the nation. By mid-January they were a Top 10 team, but then limped through the rest of the Big 12 schedule and got into the tournament despite a 18-13 record and a six-game losing streak in February.
This year’s squad is trying its best to duplicate that feat, without Young. They went 11-1 in 2018, and were still 13-3 on January 12th. They’ve now lost five straight Big 12 games, sit at 3-9 in conference, with two of those wins coming against Oklahoma State. The last win was against the worst team in the SEC, Vanderbilt.
NCAA Prognosis: KenPom has them again projected at 18-13 to finish the regular season. But I’m not sure that’s good enough this year. What they don’t have is the really big win to differentiate at the bubble. Their best win, by opponent NET rating, is at home against Wofford. They probably need to close at least 3-3 AND get a win either at home against Kansas, or at Iowa State or Kansas State.
Arizona Wildcats (14-11)
It was expected to be a rebuilding year in Tucson, and the tournament was no guarantee this year. They had zero returning starters, and under the cloud of the NCAA investigation, lost some big name recruits.
They were 9-4 entering January, but that did include a win over Iowa State and all the losses were to teams that will be in the NCAA tournament. Then, they got off to a 4-0 start in the Pac-12, and it looked like they might be able to run through the disappointing conference and still get an at-large. But with last night’s loss to Utah, they have now lost six straight in the Pac-12, and seven of the last eight.
NCAA Prognosis: Have to win the Pac-12 tournament or the Arizona Wildcats will miss the tournament for the first time since 2012.
Florida Gators (13-11)
Florida hasn’t collapsed with long losing streaks recently like other teams on this list, but what they have done is continuously come up short against the types of teams that will be in the NCAA Tournament. Florida sits at 5-6 in conference after beating lowly Vanderbilt at home this week. But they are 1-9 against Quadrant 1 opponents in the NET rankings this season.
The squad led by KeVaughn Allen peaked at 18th in Ken Pomeroy’s rankings on January 5th, then lost at home to South Carolina. The only Quad 1 win is at Arkansas, who will likely not be in the NCAA field.
NCAA Prognosis: Need big wins, or they will be this year’s Louisville. They have four more Quadrant 1 games remaining: at Alabama, at LSU, vs. LSU, and at Kentucky to end the regular season. They really need to win two of those, and not take bad losses in the other three games.
Creighton Blue Jays (13-12)
Creighton was 10-4 entering January. The four losses were to two teams also on this list (Oklahoma and Nebraska) plus Gonzaga and Ohio State. They then won the conference opener at Providence and were squarely in the tournament mix.
But they have lost 8 of the last 11 in Big East play, including going 0-3 in overtime.
NCAA Prognosis: Very slim chance of an at-large. The Big East isn’t strong enough this year for a team with a losing conference record to get in the field. Creighton also lacks big wins, and is 0-3 against Villanova and Marquette, the only wins that will boost the resume at this point. They must win 5 of the last 6 and beat Marquette on the road to realistically be in at-large consideration.