Is NIL Killing March Madness Upsets? A Deep Dive

Once Upon a Time in March Madness

March Madness has always been synonymous with underdog victories—the Cinderellas that steal the spotlight and make history with upsets. Who could forget Princeton's stunning performance against UCLA or the unforgettable buzzer-beater by Valparaiso's Bryce Drew? These moments made NCAA tournaments a highlight on the sporting calendar, drawing fans in droves. Today, however, there's a noticeable shift in the narrative. The once-reliable underdog stories seem to be fading, and the excitement we once knew is changing rapidly.

NIL: The Game-Changing Factor

The introduction of Name, Image, and Likeness (NIL) rights has dramatically altered the landscape of college basketball. No longer are talented players confined to mid-major schools; they can capitalize on their marketability while playing in power conferences. This shift leaves smaller programs scrambling to keep up, and as a result, the talent gap continues to widen. The numbers are staggering: only 29 small-conference teams defeated power-conference teams this season, a 58.9% decline since the NIL era began in 2021-22.

“The shocking upsets are decreasing, and fewer double-digit seeds are surviving.”

The Financial Chasm

Consider the financial implications. Power-conference schools can now afford to lure top recruits, leaving mid-majors at a disadvantage. The NCAA's recent settlement enabling player payments has further exacerbated this issue. In fact, less than 10% of players earning over $100,000 through NIL come from non-power conferences. This has prompted many mid-major coaches to sell their programs as potential stepping stones to richer schools, sacrificing continuity—the very element that often fueled their Cinderella runs. As one coach lamented, “We lose all these players to a higher level and don't have the money to replace them.”

Shifting Scheduling Strategies

The scheduling strategies of power-conference teams underscore this trend. They are opting for fewer games against non-power programs, instead prioritizing high-profile neutral-site matchups. This has resulted in drastically reduced opportunities for mid-major teams to showcase their talent. The year-over-year drop from 666 to 616 games between power and non-power teams speaks volumes. There's an increasing reluctance to engage small-conference teams, often deemed a risk. As Michigan State's associate athletic director remarked, “Some programs might be avoiding dangerous mid-majors.”

Data Tells the Tale

Statistics further illuminate the picture. Last year's tournament saw only 13 outright underdog wins, a trend noted as one of the least exciting tournaments in recent memory. For the first time in modern history, three consecutive tournaments have gone without multiple double-digit seeds making it to the Sweet 16. What does this suggest? Quite simply, that today's dynamics make it more challenging for these underdogs to survive beyond the first few rounds.

The Bigger Picture

I spoke with college basketball data analyst Ken Pomeroy, who noted that the top teams now hold higher ratings than ever before. With increased talent on the power-conference side, the divide grows. The betting markets reflect this widening gap. In the 2021-22 season, non-power conference teams were underdogs by an average of 16.3 points against their power-conference opponents. Fast forward to this season, and that number has surged to 22.9 points. The implications are clear: bigger spreads mean fewer anticipated upsets.

Looking Ahead

As we venture into the 2026 NCAA tournament, I'm left wondering: Will we ever return to the thrilling unpredictability that defined March Madness? Do we still hold onto hope for the Cinderellas? While the on-court talent of power-conference teams may be undeniably better, I believe there's a strong allure in the chaos of single-elimination basketball. The theater of the game remains, and perhaps, with time, the underdog narratives will find their way back into our hearts.