The Art of a March Madness Upset

March Madness earns its name every year when underdogs defy the odds. Upsets – those thrilling games where a lower-seeded team knocks off a favorite – are the lifeblood of the NCAA Men’s Basketball Tournament. Fans live for moments like 16-seed UMBC stunning No. 1 Virginia in 2018, the first-ever 16-over-1 victory that dropped the all-time record of 1-seeds vs 16s to 135-1. From 15-seed Saint Peter’s toppling 2-seed Kentucky in 2022 to 11-seed Loyola Chicago’s Cinderella Final Four run in 2018, these surprises captivate the nation. What causes some underdogs to rise to the occasion? Let’s dig into the history, stats, and trends behind March Madness upsets and see how that knowledge can help spot the next giant killer in the 2025 tournament.

Upsets by the Numbers: How Often Do They Happen?

Every tournament, we expect chaos – and it reliably delivers. On average, about 8 lower-seeded teams win in the first round each year​. In fact, since the field expanded to 64 teams in 1985, the first round has produced roughly 8 upsets out of 32 games on average. Of course, not all upsets are created equal. A 10-seed beating a 7-seed isn’t shocking (10s win about 39% of those matchups), but a 15 over a 2 is the kind of bracket-busting madness fans crave.

Historically, certain seed matchups are especially ripe for upsets:

No. 11 vs No. 6: No. 11 seeds have won approximately 39.1% of these matchups since the tournament expanded in 1985, with 61 victories over No. 6 seeds. At least two 11-seeds have advanced in six of the last eight tournaments, and the last time all four 11-seeds lost in the first round was 2004. These teams often come from strong mid-major conferences or are battle-tested power-conference teams that underachieved in the regular season but have the talent to make a run. If you’re banking on a 6-seed to carry you through Day 1 of a Survivor contest, think twice—it’s far from a lock.

No. 12 vs No. 5: No. 12 seeds have achieved 55 upsets against No. 5 seeds, resulting in a 35.26% success rate since 1985. In many years, you can count on at least one 12-over-5 upset—it’s happened more than half the time. Some years, like 2015 and 2018, saw no 12-seed victories, but in other years, multiple 12s have advanced. These teams are often elite mid-majors with high win totals and dangerous scoring threats. A well-rounded 12-seed with a strong backcourt is a serious threat to any 5-seed lacking elite athleticism or guard play.

No. 13 vs No. 4: No. 13 seeds have a 21.15% win rate against No. 4 seeds, with 33 victories since 1985. While less frequent than the famous 12-over-5 upsets, we typically see at least one 13-seed pull off an upset every two to three years. Just look at Ohio beating Virginia in 2021 or North Texas stunning Purdue in the same tournament. The recipe for a 13-seed upset is usually elite three-point shooting, a strong defensive identity, or a high-usage star who can take over a game. If a 4-seed enters the tournament struggling, don’t be surprised if a confident 13-seed sends them packing early.

No. 14 vs No. 3: No. 14 seeds have won 23 games against No. 3 seeds, equating to a 14.74% win rate since 1985. While still uncommon, there are enough examples to take these games seriously. Recent upsets include Stephen F. Austin over West Virginia in 2016 and Mercer’s stunning win over Duke in 2014. The teams that pull off these wins usually play with a chip on their shoulder, thrive in chaos, or excel at slowing the game down to frustrate high-powered opponents. A sluggish or turnover-prone 3-seed should be on upset watch if they draw a scrappy 14-seed that can dictate tempo.

No. 15 vs No. 2: No. 15 seeds have an 11-145 all-time record against No. 2 seeds, translating to a 7.05% win rate. While rare, these upsets have become more common recently, with four 15-seeds winning since 2021 alone. Saint Peter’s made history in 2022 by becoming just the third 15-seed ever to reach the Sweet 16, later advancing to the Elite Eight. Before that, Oral Roberts in 2021 and Florida Gulf Coast’s “Dunk City” run in 2013 captured national attention. If a 15-seed can knock down threes at a high clip or control the pace, it can catch a No. 2 seed off guard.

No. 16 vs No. 1: For decades, it was unthinkable—No. 16 seeds were 0-135 against 1-seeds until UMBC’s historic win over Virginia in 2018. Just five years later, Fairleigh Dickinson stunned Purdue in 2023, proving that even the top teams aren’t invincible. That being said, the record still stands at 2-154, meaning this is the ultimate long shot. The 1-seeds that have fallen were slow-paced, defensive-minded teams with shaky offenses, making them vulnerable to hot shooting from an underdog. A high-powered 16-seed with nothing to lose and a fearless approach is the only type of team capable of pulling off this monumental upset.

Keep in mind the NCAA’s official definition of an “upset” is a win by a team seeded 5 or more lines lower than its opponent. By that definition, a 9 over 8 or 10 over 7 isn’t an upset, but fans generally celebrate any lower-seed victory. And the madness isn’t confined to round one – we often see double-digit seeds in the Sweet 16 and beyond. In fact, practically every year a double-digit seed crashes the Sweet 16 (sometimes multiple). The allure of March Madness is that even as top seeds dominate overall, there are always a few Davids slaying Goliaths each tournament.

Common Traits of Giant Killers: How Underdogs Succeed

So what allows certain underdogs to pull off these shockers? Upsets aren’t purely random – many giant killers share common traits and styles of play that give them an edge on the big stage. Here are some of the key factors that make an underdog dangerous:

• Experienced, Steady Guard Play: It’s often said veteran guards win in March, and the stats back this up. Underdogs that take care of the ball can neutralize a talent gap. One analysis found turnover percentage was a huge predictor of upsets – each 1% decrease in turnovers increased an underdog’s chances by 26%​. In other words, Cinderellas usually have confident ball-handlers who won’t get rattled by defensive pressure. A team that doesn’t beat itself with mistakes can hang around longer and capitalize when the favorite falters.

• Disciplined Defense (and Fewer Fouls): Underdogs often win by playing scrappy, smart defense. The same study noted that a lower opponent free-throw rate (i.e. not fouling shooters) was a significant factor – underdogs that avoid sending opponents to the line have a better shot at victory​. By playing clean defense and forcing the other team to earn every point from the field, a weaker team can frustrate a powerhouse. Not giving away free points keeps the game within reach. Underdogs that communicate well on defense, contest every shot, and stay out of foul trouble can put a favorite on upset alert.

• The 3-Point Equalizer: The three-point shot is often called the great equalizer in college basketball. A hot shooting night from deep can carry an underdog to a stunning win (conversely, a cold night can doom a favorite). Many famous upsets featured lower seeds catching fire from beyond the arc – think of 14-seed UAB raining threes to beat Iowa State in 2015, or Cleveland State bombing away to shock Wake Forest in 2009. While hard to predict, a team that relies on the three can be volatile – which is exactly what you want when you’re the weaker team. High variance is an underdog’s friend. If a small-conference team has a couple of knockdown shooters and they get hot, watch out. On the flip side, if a top seed lives and dies by the three and goes cold, an upset can materialize quickly.

• Strength in One Key Area: Underdogs don’t usually have a complete team, but many have one facet of the game where they excel. Some are elite defensive teams that can muck up the game (e.g. 11-seed Loyola Chicago in 2018 had a top-20 defense that stifled opponents). Others have a go-to scorer who can take over (like CJ McCollum scoring 30 to lead 15-seed Lehigh over Duke in 2012). Or they dominate the boards, or shoot exceptionally well. Having one pronounced strength can compensate for other weaknesses and give a favorite trouble. For example, if a low seed has a formidable frontcourt that can outrebound a higher seed, they can control the tempo and get second-chance points. Or if they have a point guard who can penetrate at will, they might foul out the opponent’s big men. Upset-minded teams maximize their strengths and impose their style on the game.

• Composure and Confidence: The mental aspect shouldn’t be overlooked. Teams that pull upsets often play with a fearless, nothing-to-lose attitude. They don’t get intimidated by the big name on the opposing jersey. Many are battle-tested champions of smaller conferences who are used to high-pressure games. Upperclassmen leadership is common – seniors who have played together for years and won’t fold in crunch time. When the game gets tight in the final minutes, underdogs that believe they can win often do. We’ve seen even highly seeded teams tighten up under the weight of expectations, while the underdog plays loose and free. That mental edge can tilt a close game. As soon as a favorite lets an underdog “hang around,” the pressure shifts onto the higher seed, and anything can happen.

One hallmark many Cinderella teams share is efficient play – they maximize each possession. They might play at a slower tempo to shorten the game and reduce the total number of possessions, which inherently creates more variance in the outcome. Fewer possessions mean a big favorite has less time to assert dominance and pull away. Upset-minded teams often try to control the pace: if they’re outsized or outgunned athletically, they’ll value each possession, work the shot clock, and make it a grind-it-out affair. (Think of 15-seed Middle Tennessee slowing things down and executing meticulously to stun Michigan State in 2016, or Princeton’s deliberate offense upsetting UCLA in 1996.) By contrast, if the underdog is a high-octane team, they might speed up the game to force a frenetic pace the favorite isn’t comfortable with – for example, 15-seed Florida Gulf Coast used an up-tempo, above-the-rim style to overwhelm Georgetown in 2013. The key is that great underdogs dictate style rather than letting the favorite play its preferred game.

Reading the Analytics: What the Stats Say About Upsets

In the modern game, we have advanced metrics that can help flag which underdogs are truly dangerous. One of the most respected is Ken Pomeroy’s ratings (KenPom), which use efficiency metrics to rate teams independent of win-loss record. While the Selection Committee seeds teams based on résumé and overall record, KenPom’s rankings aim to predict future performance on a neutral court. This difference can highlight teams that are under-seeded – i.e. their seed is worse (higher number) than their true strength.

Recent history shows that these under-seeded teams are prime candidates to score upsets. Over the last nine tournaments, 17 teams ranked in KenPom’s top 35 ended up with a seed of 11 or worse​. Those teams went 22-17 straight up in their games (including First Four play-ins)​. In fact, only five of them lost in the Round of 64​ - meaning the vast majority either won at least one game or were eliminated in the First Four. When you see a double-digit seed that the efficiency metrics love, there’s a strong chance they’ll justify that faith.

Examples abound: 2018 Loyola Chicago was only an 11-seed, but KenPom rated them the 31st best team in the country – lo and behold, they marched to the Final Four​. In 2017, 11-seed Xavier was KenPom #31 and reached the Elite Eight. That same year, 11-seed Rhode Island (KenPom #34) knocked off Creighton in round one. Or consider 2016 Wichita State – they barely made the tournament as an 11-seed, but KenPom had them top-15 (#13). The Shockers validated that by winning two games (First Four and first round) and nearly a third. The takeaway: if a team’s computer metrics are far better than their seed, pay attention. Upset picks should always include an eye on KenPom or similar efficiency rankings.

Conversely, when looking at potential Goliaths that might fall, analytics can reveal weaknesses in top seeds. Many of the few #1 or #2 seeds that have been upset early shared one of two red flags: an imbalanced team or a glacial tempo. Specifically, four of the nine #1 or #2 seeds to lose in the first round since 2001 were ranked outside the top 75 nationally in either offensive or defensive efficiency. In other words, they had a notable weakness on one side of the ball despite their lofty seeding. For example, in 2012 Duke was a 2-seed but only 79th in defense, and they got torched by 15-seed Lehigh. In 2013, Georgetown was a 2-seed with the nation’s 80th-rated offense and fell to 15-seed FGCU. A high seed that is elite on one end but just mediocre on the other is more vulnerable than a well-balanced powerhouse.

The other red flag is tempo. Three of those nine shocking 1/2-seed losses involved teams that played at an exceptionally slow pace (2023 Purdue, 2018 Virginia, 2016 Michigan State). As noted earlier, a slow tempo means fewer possessions, which increases variance and gives the underdog a fighting chance. Virginia’s famously methodical pace contributed to their historic loss vs UMBC – in a short game, a shooting burst by the underdog can put the favorite in a hole they don’t have time to climb out of. The lesson: when filling out your bracket, watch for a top seed that’s significantly weaker on offense or defense or plays much slower than average. If they draw a halfway decent opponent, an upset isn’t as far-fetched as it might seem.

Finally, metrics like KenPom also adjust for strength of schedule, so they can highlight mid-major teams that would be solid even against power-conference competition. Don’t be fooled by a gaudy record alone – look at how a team won. A scrappy mid-major that ranks, say, top 50 in defensive efficiency and barely lost to a few big programs early in the year could be a Cinderella waiting to happen. Meanwhile, a 25–7 team that feasted on a weak schedule and rates outside the top 100 in efficiency is likely a paper tiger. In March, the numbers have a way of cutting through the hype.

Patterns to Watch for in 2025’s Tournament

All these insights from past tournaments give us a roadmap for spotting potential upsets in the 2025 NCAA Tournament. While the bracket is not finalized at the time of writing, we have a good sense of many teams that will be dancing and how they might be seeded. Here’s how the “art of the upset” could apply to this year’s field:

• Dangerous Mid-Major Champions: Several smaller conference winners project as those classic 12- to 13-seeds that no high seed wants to face. For example, Drake, the Missouri Valley champion, is projected around a 12-seed and could face a team like Illinois in the first round. Drake has a veteran squad that takes care of the ball and shoots it well – the exact profile of a giant killer. Similarly, keep an eye on Lipscomb, the Atlantic Sun champion, projected as a 13-seed potentially drawing 4-seed Clemson. Lipscomb traditionally plays an up-tempo style and can light it up offensively. If Clemson (from the ACC) struggles to score at times – as they have in past tournaments – a hot shooting mid-major like Lipscomb could capitalize. Utah Valley (WAC champion) is another to watch; they’re slated as a 14-seed against a 3-seed (Texas A&M in one projection). Utah Valley has size in the frontcourt and a slow, deliberate approach that could frustrate a power conference opponent. The key is that these teams aren’t just happy to be there – they expect to compete.

• Undervalued KenPom Darlings: As mentioned, double-digit seeds that rank highly in efficiency metrics are prime upset candidates. Early indicators for 2025 show teams like VCU and Utah State in the 10–11 seed range, and both have metrics suggesting they’re better than that. Utah State (projected 10-seed) faces Missouri (7-seed) in one bracket prediction– the Aggies have been a top-40 KenPom team much of the year, boasting a deadly three-point attack and solid experience. VCU (projected 10 or 11 seed) is a defensive-oriented team that forces a ton of turnovers, a trait that could fluster higher-seeded opponents. If the committee under-seeds these squads, don’t be surprised if they pull off a first-round win. UC San Diego is a dark horse example – projected as an 11-seed out of the Big West. Big West champs are usually a 13 or 14-seed, so an 11-seed projection means UCSD might be legitimately strong (perhaps rated in the top 50–60 nationally). If that holds, they could absolutely shock a 6-seed. Be on the lookout for any double-digit seed that the analytical models say should be favored or only a slight underdog – those are the teams that historically deliver upsets.

• Power-Conference Sleepers: Not all underdogs are mid-majors. Sometimes a big-name program that underachieved during the regular season sneaks in as a low seed and then finds its stride in March. In 2025, there are a few candidates. West Virginia and Indiana are currently on the bubble, potentially meeting in a First Four play-in as 11-seeds. Both come from major conferences (Big 12 and Big Ten respectively) and have talented rosters that, on a good day, can play with anyone. If either one survives the First Four, they could carry that momentum and knock off a 6-seed – not unlike UCLA’s First Four-to-Final Four run in 2021. Likewise, keep an eye on San Diego State. Yes, SDSU was a national title game participant in 2023, but this year they’ve been inconsistent and might end up as a double-digit seed (one projection had them in a play-in game as an 11). The Aztecs, however, have a suffocating defense and loads of tournament experience. They fit the mold of past under-seeded teams like 2014 Tennessee (an 11-seed that made the Sweet 16) – if they’re in the field, they’ll be a tough matchup for any 5 or 6-seed.

• Beware the Overhyped Mid-Major: Interestingly, while we love mid-major Cinderellas, history shows that when a mid-major earns a high seed (say a 3, 4, or 5 seed), they often underperform. Over the last decade, top-five-seeded mid-majors have been upset at an alarming rate (with the major exception of perennial power Gonzaga). In the last 11 tournaments, 17 mid-major teams got a top-5 seed and seven of them lost in the first round, with several more falling in the second. Just last year in 2024, 5-seed Saint Mary’s (from the WCC) was taken down by 12-seed Grand Canyon. The pressure of being the favorite isn’t always kind to these smaller programs. For 2025, this is a factor if, say, a team like Gonzaga (now a 6-seed in projections) or any non-power conference team gets seeded in that 4-5 range. It appears most of the top-four seeds this year will be power schools, but if one slips in (perhaps Mountain West champion New Mexico as an 8/9 seed, or Atlantic 10 champ VCU as a 10), just remember: being the hunted is a different challenge for a mid-major. Don’t automatically advance them because “they’re a cool underdog” – an even hungrier underdog might be waiting to knock them off.

• Top Seeds on Upset Alert: It’s hard to pinpoint which of the elite teams (1- and 2-seeds) might be vulnerable until the bracket and matchups are set, but using the guidelines above we can speculate. Among projected #1 seeds in 2025 are teams like Auburn, Duke, Houston, and Florida. Most of those are well-rounded teams from power conferences, so there’s no obvious weakness jumping out. Houston, for instance, is known for tough defense and tournament poise. However, look at the projected #2 seeds: one is Tennessee, a team with an elite defense but sometimes suspect offense (a common profile in their past upset losses). Under coach Rick Barnes, Tennessee has been upset before when they couldn’t score enough, so if they draw a hot-shooting 15-seed, things could get interesting. Another projected #2 is Texas Tech– they traditionally play a slow, grinding style and often excel more on defense than offense. A slow tempo, as noted, can be risky against a feisty underdog. If either of those teams faces a first-round opponent that can speed them up or hit a bunch of shots, those games could be tighter than a typical 2-vs-15 matchup. To be clear, the odds of a 1 or 2 seed losing remain very low – but the recipe for it is usually a top seed that has a noticeable flaw running into a lower seed that can exploit it. Come Selection Sunday, we’ll evaluate each top seed: if any is ranked, say, outside the top 50 in offensive efficiency or has injury issues, or relies heavily on one star player, they might be the Goliath to watch for a David with a sling.

• First Four Magic: Don’t overlook the teams that win in the First Four play-in games. They’ve essentially got a “warm-up” game under tournament pressure and can be very dangerous to a fresh, higher seed in the next round. We’ve seen this with 11-seeds like VCU (who went from First Four to Final Four in 2011) and UCLA (First Four to Final Four in 2021). In 2025, the First Four at-large teams will likely include some well-known programs (as mentioned, possibly West Virginia, Indiana, Xavier, or others). Whichever teams emerge from those play-ins will be battle-tested and confident – a scary prospect for the 5 or 6 seed waiting for them. History suggests at least one First Four team wins another game in the main draw, so anticipate one of those 11 or 12 seeds making a run to the Round of 32 or Sweet 16.

Embrace the Madness

Predicting upsets is as much art as science. We can analyze the efficiency stats, look at recent trends, and identify mismatches, but there will always be surprises that defy logic – that’s the beauty of March Madness. The patterns are clear: experienced guards, strong defense, under-seeded teams, and slow-tempo favorites all set the stage for a potential upset. And in a Survivor contest, recognizing these trends could be the difference between advancing and getting knocked out early.

This year, take your upset predictions beyond the bracket and test your skills in the Survivor Madness World Championship on Splash Sports. Survivor isn’t just about picking winners - it’s about planning ahead, knowing when to take risks, and saving the right teams for later rounds. Can you ride a Cinderella to glory? Or will you survive the chaos by sticking with the powerhouses at the right moments?

As the tournament unfolds, the upsets will come. The only question is—will you be ready for them? Join now, embrace the madness, and put your Survivor skills to the test. One perfect run could change everything.