{"id":824628,"date":"2026-03-21T05:46:23","date_gmt":"2026-03-21T05:46:23","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.rawchili.com\/nfl\/824628\/"},"modified":"2026-03-21T05:46:23","modified_gmt":"2026-03-21T05:46:23","slug":"high-point-leads-ncaa-tournaments-most-likely-upsets-for-round-2","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.rawchili.com\/nfl\/824628\/","title":{"rendered":"High Point leads NCAA Tournament\u2019s most likely upsets for Round 2"},"content":{"rendered":"

The Athletic has live coverage of the 2026 Men\u2019s March Madness first round.<\/a> <\/p>\n

We have our first big upset of the 2026 NCAA Tournament<\/a>.<\/p>\n

No. 12 seed High Point shocked No. 5 Wisconsin on the strength of 15 3-pointers and, also important for upsets, 13 offensive rebounds. Those extra possessions and the 3-point barrage are pivotal events in games that see underdogs topple favorites, based on the historical upset research our Bracket Breakers team has performed across the previous 20 NCAA Tournaments.<\/p>\n

High Point entered the Big Dance as the third most-likely underdog<\/a> \u2014 seeded five or more lines below the favorite \u2014 to advance to the second round. And so they did. Can the Panthers keep it going? The short answer is yes, but there\u2019s some nuance. (This is March Madness, after all.) Here are High Point\u2019s odds for advancement, along with the upset odds for other Round 2 underdogs. That includes the TCU Horned Frogs, whose upset odds could actually be better than what our model foresees.<\/p>\n

No. 4 Arkansas Razorbacks vs. No. 12 High Point Panthers<\/p>\n

Upset chance: 30.8 percent<\/p>\n

As we posted before the first round, this matchup carried the highest potential upset of any second-round game in the West<\/a>. But first \u2026<\/p>\n

Savor this: Before Thursday afternoon, High Point had never beaten an opponent from a top-4 conference in the regular season or postseason, and the Big South teams had a 4-33 record in the NCAA Tournament. But the Panthers edged No. 5 Wisconsin in the first round thanks to a combination of factors our upset-predictions model, Slingshot, saw coming from a mile away.<\/p>\n

High Point secured more offensive rebounds than the Badgers (13-6) and committed fewer turnovers (6-10), leading to nine more shots from the field (74-65). And it kept taking those shots from long range \u2014 even when falling behind by 10 points early on, ultimately launching 40 3s. Slingshot liked the Panthers\u2019 formula and liked the matchup they got, suspecting that Wisconsin\u2019s weakness on the offensive boards and heavy reliance on outside shooting would combine to render the Badgers vulnerable.<\/p>\n

Well, like Mom always said, if you pick a No. 12 seed to beat a No. 5 seed, you might as well take them to beat the No. 4. High Point will now sling its bag of long-shot rocks at Arkansas, and our model says the Panthers have a 1-in-3 chance of knocking off another Goliath.<\/p>\n

Slingshot sees John Calipari\u2019s crew as a slightly better team than Wisconsin, but not one of the strongest teams in the country. The Razorbacks aren\u2019t particularly dominant at offensive rebounding (113th in the nation), and are notably weak on the defensive glass (ranking 207th).<\/p>\n

The Panthers may not be able to steal possessions \u2014 nobody limits turnovers better than Arkansas \u2014 but should be able to beat them on the boards. And though it might sound strange to say this about a small-conference underdog, High Point was able to exploit Wisconsin inside, not just from the perimeter, and might be able to do the same against Arkansas, which allows opponents to shoot 53.7 percent on 2-point attempts (ranking 239th).<\/p>\n

Then there\u2019s this: Of the 10 contests in our database that most resemble this matchup statistically, underdogs won five games, including the two most similar: No. 12 seed Richmond vs. Iowa in 2022 and No. 14 seed Oakland vs. Kentucky in 2024. There\u2019s a gap of nearly 19 points per 100 possessions between Arkansas and High Point in our basic power ratings, so the path to another upset is narrow. But maybe to follow it, the underdog will need to walk like a \u2026 panther.<\/p>\n

No. 3 Illinois Fighting Illini vs. No. 11 VCU Rams<\/p>\n

Upset chance: 25.8 percent<\/p>\n

We told you to beware of VCU<\/a>. We just didn\u2019t expect the Rams to have to come back from down 19 points to make it happen! Now they\u2019re on to the second round to face Illinois, and Slingshot gives the Rams a 1-in-4 chance of taking down the Illini.<\/p>\n

That\u2019s not bad, especially considering that Illinois is a much safer giant than UNC. Slingshot says Illinois is the seventh-best team in the country. The Illini also succeed in generating extra possessions through a rare combination: ball-handling and rebounding. Illinois ranks 10th in the nation with a 13.2 percent turnover rate and is even better on the offensive glass (38.7 percent, third in the country). That\u2019s part of why they have the nation\u2019s second-most-efficient offense. But here\u2019s the thing: Part of that success is the result of taking more than 50 percent of their shots from 3-point range. That\u2019s analytically sound, but it also introduces more variance. And as we saw from Wisconsin on Thursday, favorites don\u2019t want to increase the range of outcomes.<\/p>\n

Additionally, the Illini don\u2019t force turnovers. That could give VCU\u2019s offense extra bites at the apple. And if they shoot 3s as well as they did against North Carolina (11 of 26), they\u2019ll have a chance. Add in the fact that three of the eight most similar contests in our database went to the underdog, and VCU has a case to make for a trip to the Sweet 16.<\/p>\n

No. 2 Houston Cougars vs. No. 10 Texas A&M Aggies<\/p>\n

Upset chance: 24 percent<\/p>\n

Texas A&M is yet another one of the \u201cwounded assassins\u201d that we warned could be the most dangerous underdogs in this year\u2019s tournament. Year after year, power conference teams get beaten up in league play, land a double-digit seed, then make a run in March. And the Aggies have enough firepower to consider the possibility of joining that club.<\/p>\n

As devotees of Bucky Ball, they launch tons of 3-pointers \u2014 46.2 percent of their shots to be exact. That introduces some critically important variance against a stout defensive team like Houston. Three of the seven most similar games in our model\u2019s database also ended in upsets.<\/p>\n

That said, the Cougars are masters of the possession game, particularly when it comes to turnovers (13 percent rate on offense; 21 percent on defense). And they are about 15.4 points per 100 possessions better than the Aggies, according to Slingshot\u2019s power ratings. Still, the Aggies have a shooter\u2019s chance, and as a No. 10 seed against a No. 2, that\u2019s all you can ask for.<\/p>\n

\u200b\u200bNo. 3 Gonzaga Bulldogs vs. No. 11 Texas Longhorns<\/p>\n

Upset chance: 22.5 percent<\/p>\n

Before the tournament started, we explained that Texas was precisely the kind of team built to exceed expectations: The Longhorns were \u201cwounded assassins\u201d who were better than their record suggested because they had an unfortunate record in close games. They\u2019d be a particularly strong underdog because they are so adept at building possessions, ranking 29th in the country in offensive rebounding percentage. And there just wasn\u2019t that big of a gap in our basic power ratings between the Longhorns and either NC State or BYU. Two wins later, Texas has made it to the second round.<\/p>\n

Texas is still carrying traits of successful underdogs, but its next opponent is in a different weight class. Gonzaga is dominant inside, protects the ball, hits the offensive boards and scores 122.0 adjusted points per 100 possessions. All that and the Bulldogs are better on defense than offense. Our model sees the Zags as one of the 10 best teams in the country, and it notes that only one of the 10 games in our database most similar to this matchup yielded an upset.<\/p>\n

No. 1 Duke Blue Devils vs. No. 9 TCU Horned Frogs<\/p>\n

Upset chance: 10.1 percent<\/p>\n

That gust of wind you felt around 5 p.m. ET Thursday was Duke fans collectively exhaling after nearly losing to No. 16 Siena. But expect them to be wound just as tight Saturday when they take on the Horned Frogs. Because these upset odds may be higher than they appear above.<\/p>\n

Our model technically gives TCU only a 10.1 percent chance of winning, but it\u2019s basing that rating on a full-strength Duke squad. This version of the roster \u2014 minus Caleb Foster and Patrick Ngongba \u2014 is not what we\u2019ve seen from Duke over the course of the season, despite having won all five games without that duo (counting the second half of the regular-season finale against North Carolina).<\/p>\n

Duke\u2019s perimeter shooting and defense are compromised without Foster, while Ngongba\u2019s absence has severely impacted its rim protection, rebounding and playmaking (he initiates much of Duke\u2019s offense from the top of the arc). Maybe the Blue Devils will get Ngongba back, but how effective will he be? Duke is not the analytical juggernaut it was before the injuries and, as a result, we believe the true odds of an upset are much greater than 10 percent.<\/p>\n

That opinion is not just due to Duke\u2019s potential weaknesses. TCU features many strengths that we see in successful underdogs, particularly when it comes to the possession game. The Horned Frogs force turnovers on 19.4 percent of possessions (35th in the nation) and give it away only 15.4 percent of the time (96th). They grab 34.3 percent of available offensive rebounds and only allow their opponents to collect 28.8 percent. They\u2019re not a great shooting team (200th in effective field goal percentage), but they hit 9 of 23 3s against Ohio State in the first round, so they can go off on a given night. Add it all up, and that\u2019s much better than a 10 percent chance.<\/p>\n

No. 1 Michigan Wolverines vs. No. 9 Saint Louis Billikens<\/p>\n

Upset chance: 9.9 percent<\/p>\n

In our preview of the Midwest region, we noted that the gap between Michigan\u2019s effective field goal percentage and eFG percentage allowed is the second-biggest of any team in the country, and asked if you could guess who is No. 1. The answer is the Billikens, whose shooting stats clock in at 59.9 percent and 44.6 percent allowed, for a ginormous gap of more than 15 points.<\/p>\n

Saint Louis is a strong team, and just obliterated Georgia in the first round. But this particular spot is no place to fall in love with an underdog. Here\u2019s where Slingshot\u2019s similarity metric is really revealing. Of the 10 games in our database most similar to the matchup between Michigan and Saint Louis, not one produced an upset. And one particular team stands out among the Wolverines\u2019 comps: Kansas\u2019 national championship team in 2008.<\/p>\n

Simply put, the historical data shows this game is really about the overwhelming strength of the favorite. Slingshot estimates that Michigan has the No. 4 offense and No. 2 defense in the country, and it\u2019s going to take at least another round before the Wolverines meet an opponent who can seriously challenge that efficiency.<\/p>\n

Sunday GamesNo. 2 UConn Huskies vs No. 7 UCLA Bruins<\/p>\n

Upset chance: 23.4 percent<\/p>\n

The intense Huskies successfully contest shots down low and outside, holding opponents to an effective field goal percentage of just 45.7 percent (ranking eighth in the nation) and 94.2 adjusted points per 100 possessions (11th fewest). You can quibble about whether UConn has been as dominant as some pundits expected early this season, but Slingshot sees this grinding, highly efficient group as an especially strong Goliath because they are so effective on the offensive boards, assigning the Huskies a Safety Rating of 94.<\/p>\n

The Bruins are a classic example of what we call a \u201cSlow Killer.\u201d The way Mick Cronin ran teams back in his Cincinnati days practically forced us to invent the term for this style of play. They operate at the pace of a faucet drip (64.7 adjusted possessions per game, ranking 318th), protect the ball (13.4 percent turnover rate, ranking 11th), shoot 3s well (38.2 percent) but only opportunistically, and limit opponents\u2019 efficiency.<\/p>\n

Underdogs of this type are often very effective at throwing superior opponents out of sync, and have pulled off many memorable upsets \u2014 think of Wichita State at the Shockers\u2019 mid-2010s peak, or UCLA\u2019s own run from the First Four to the Final Four in 2021. The odds here represent the chance that the Bruins can frustrate the Huskies into taking suboptimal shots or committing too many fouls. UCLA has played a slew of very close games against very strong opponents this year \u2014 Arizona, Purdue, Illinois, Michigan State \u2014 and this is likely to be another.<\/p>\n

No. 2 Iowa State Cyclones vs. No. 7 Kentucky Wildcats<\/p>\n

Upset chance: 22.8 percent<\/p>\n

This, ladies and gentlemen, is a classic battle of Bracket Breakers heavyweights. In one corner: Iowa State, a program we have watched T.J. Otzelberger transform from a 2-22 wreck into a chaos-inducing giant-killer in 2022, his first season, and then into a national championship contender since 2024. In the other corner, Kentucky, which has reached the second round more often than any team in NCAA Tournament history.<\/p>\n

These aren\u2019t just the fifth- and 23rd-best teams in the country, according to our model, but archetypes. Iowa State hits the offensive glass, protects the ball, forces turnovers at the fourth-highest rate in the nation, and shoots 3s infrequently but well (38.7 percent, ranking 10th). Slingshot says the Cyclones\u2019 statistical profile adds more than five points per 100 possessions to their performance as a tournament favorite. The Wildcats slow opponents down, limiting their perimeter shooting \u2014 though Santa Clara landed a few 3s against them! \u2014 and put their massive size to work on the offensive boards. This combination of traits is also highly effective. Slingshot estimates it boosts Kentucky\u2019s underdog strength by over 10 points per 100 possessions.<\/p>\n

Evaluating the matchup here with these teams at full strength, our model tilts strongly toward the favorite. A key reason: It finds Iowa State to be like some truly powerful squads from the past, such as Louisville in 2013, Tennessee in 2024, and Houston in recent seasons. Only one of the 10 games that most closely resemble this contest produced an upset. But Joshua Jefferson sustained an ankle injury on Friday. And if the versatile Iowa State forward (16.6 points, 7.6 rebounds and 4.9 assists per game) can\u2019t go, that will clearly boost Kentucky\u2019s chances. Depending on Jefferson\u2019s availability, we\u2019re looking at odds between a puncher\u2019s chance and a true slugfest.<\/p>\n

No. 1 Arizona Wildcats vs. No. 9 Utah State Aggies<\/p>\n

Upset Chance: 19.7 percent<\/p>\n

Slingshot absolutely loves Utah State. It takes the Aggies\u2019 solid power rating (32nd in the country) and adds a whopping 11.6 points per 100 possessions because of their underdog-friendly style. They force turnovers, hit 3s, grab offensive rebounds and have a large disparity between pace on offense (fast) and defense (long possessions). We\u2019re glad they\u2019re getting their shot in a Bracket Breaker game after surviving Villanova.<\/p>\n

But Utah State only has a 1-in-5 chance of beating Arizona for two reasons. First, Arizona\u2019s traits fit our model\u2019s view of a safe favorite. The Wildcats are masters of extra possessions, particularly in terms of rebounding, and they have a decided size advantage over the Aggies. Second, none of the 10 most similar games in our model\u2019s database ended in an upset. The most similar matchup was Duke\u2019s 23-point win over Baylor last year.<\/p>\n

Utah State will have to take \u2014 and make \u2014 a ton of 3s to have a chance to win. We all know that Arizona is reluctant to shoot from deep, so even if the Wildcats score on a higher percentage of possessions, the Aggies can negate that edge by taking more valuable shots. Otherwise, if they get into a battle over 2s and free throws, the Aggies are in big trouble.<\/p>\n

No. 1 Florida Gators vs. No. 9 Iowa Hawkeyes<\/p>\n

Upset Chance: 18.6 percent<\/p>\n

Analytics don\u2019t get much simpler than this: The Gators hit nearly 58 percent of their 2-point shots, dominate the boards at both ends and play fast, converting their outstanding efficiency into large point differentials. That formula won Florida a national championship last season, and they have followed up by posting 13 games this year where they\u2019ve scored 90 or more points while allowing 80 or fewer.<\/p>\n

The Hawkeyes, who play at the pace of a Thomas Pynchon<\/a> paragraph, showcased their methodical style in their first-round win over Clemson, and they force turnovers on more than 20 percent of opponent possessions. But they rank 273rd in the country in 2-point field goal percentage allowed, which is a scary stat for a squad about to face Alex Condon, Thomas Haugh & Co.<\/p>\n

When you\u2019re an underdog playing like you\u2019re Drake in 2025 \u2014 Iowa averages 63.1 possessions per game, ranking 363rd in the nation \u2014 there\u2019s always a chance you can pull an opponent into a slog. And we don\u2019t have to look too far to find an example of a Slow Killer endangering Florida: UConn held the Gators to a 2-point win in the second round of last year\u2019s NCAA Tournament. So take these odds as a sign that anything can happen. But against an outfit that Slingshot sees as similar to North Carolina in 2016, Kentucky in 2019 and Florida itself last year, it usually doesn\u2019t.<\/p>\n

No. 2 Purdue Boilermakers vs. No. 7 Miami Hurricanes<\/p>\n

Upset Chance: 17 percent<\/p>\n

Purdue has long been the butt of Slingshot\u2019s jokes (seriously, it tells jokes). After all, Purdue grades out as the worst giant ever<\/a>, given all the times it has fallen in Bracket Breaker games. But this year\u2019s squad is more statistically robust than many of its predecessors. Matt Painter\u2019s teams have always excelled on the glass, and this team is no different, ranking in the top 25 in both offensive and defensive rebounding percentage. It has also cut its turnover rate all the way down to 13.6, part of why it has the nation\u2019s No. 1 offense.<\/p>\n

Purdue ranks only 37th on defense, in part because it allows teams to shoot 53.3 percent from 2-point range. But can Miami take advantage? Slingshot is skeptical. The Hurricanes rate as a good killer, but their strengths run right into Purdue\u2019s: Miami ranks 17th in the nation in offensive rebounding and 21st on the defensive glass. Typically, when an underdog plays a better version of themselves, they struggle.<\/p>\n

That said, those are often mid-majors. Perhaps Miami really can win the battle on the glass. The Canes also shoot very well on 2s (57.3 percent), so they may be able to attack the rim against the Boilers.<\/p>\n

Only two of the 10 most similar games in our database went to the underdog, though. And three of those wins by favorites, oddly enough, were by Purdue: twice in 2024 (vs. NC State and Utah State) and back in 2007 (vs. Florida). Miami enters with some bona fides. But if you believe in Slingshot, believe in the Boilers.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"The Athletic has live coverage of the 2026 Men\u2019s March Madness first round. We have our first big…\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":822089,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[5],"tags":[7208,4706,7643,1301,7,33965,100924,5042,4728,3499,5480,71,49,48,100921,5433,4724,7212,1078,666,50210],"class_list":["post-824628","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","category-ncaa-football","tag-arkansas-razorbacks","tag-connecticut-huskies","tag-duke-blue-devils","tag-florida-gators","tag-football","tag-gonzaga-bulldogs","tag-high-point-panthers","tag-houston-cougars","tag-illinois-fighting-illini","tag-kentucky-wildcats","tag-mens-college-basketball","tag-michigan-wolverines","tag-ncaa","tag-ncaa-football","tag-saint-louis-billikens","tag-sports-betting","tag-tcu-horned-frogs","tag-texas-am-aggies","tag-texas-longhorns","tag-ucla-bruins","tag-vcu-rams"],"share_on_mastodon":{"url":"https:\/\/channels.im\/@nfl\/116265588080531950","error":""},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.rawchili.com\/nfl\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/824628","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.rawchili.com\/nfl\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.rawchili.com\/nfl\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.rawchili.com\/nfl\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.rawchili.com\/nfl\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=824628"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.rawchili.com\/nfl\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/824628\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.rawchili.com\/nfl\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/822089"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.rawchili.com\/nfl\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=824628"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.rawchili.com\/nfl\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=824628"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.rawchili.com\/nfl\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=824628"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}