We have had multiple runs of hard luck and injuries this year. I get ripping the weak scheduling but overall are still 18-12 with some impressive wins, home and road, overall.
1) Temple loss w/out Paul and Caleb, 2) loss @ Miami w/out Paul, 3&4) lose @ Ohio St win stolen due the ref incompetence of not reviewing which led to sleeping through the Seton Hall loss and 5-9) going 2-5 since losing Mawot Mag playing on a non familiar, forced by the B1G, MSG hardwood court. That is 9 out of 12 losses under bad luck and injuries throughout the year. Rutgers still has a stronger Q1/2 record(9-8) than a bunch of teams at the 8-11 lines with too many Q3 losses or blemishes.
Kentucky has 2 Q3 losses and a Q4 loss but much higher SOS. The bubble really is very weak because of how big the gap is from Big 12 to conference 2-4, B1G, SEC and BE, and another big gap conference 5-7, MWC, Pac 12 and ACC, led to more mid major teams with high NET, weak resumes.
As far as Charleston and Oral Roberts at large, I would think they might take 1, not two as an at large first four, if both lose. How can you justify an actual seed to either resume? If they lose in the finals, it would be a Q3 loss or lower for either most likely, think Charleston has Hofstra at 88, Oral Roberts has 146 South Dakota St.
Oral Roberts(23-4, 4-0 Non D1) 0-4, 1-0, 5-0, 17-0, NET OOC SOS 5(166), SOR 42
Charleston(27-3, 1-0 Non D1) 0-1, 2-0, 9-2, 16-0, NET OOC SOS 301(338), SOR 44
Utah St has the weirdest resume ever, NET 21,
Q1/4 2-6(Q1 0-4, Q2 2-2) & Q2/3 20-1(Q2 8-1, Q3 12-0)
Can't beat good or bad teams, but 20-1 vs the middle
NET 41-80/90 is a mixed bag of resumes littered with more flaws of weaker Q1 with a cleaner sheet, weaker Q1/2 cleaner sheet, weaker resumes, and just over or under 0.500 teams that have little to no shot even with a run and loss in the finals.