Handicapping Coaches in the NCAA Tournament: What Bettors Need to Know

As March Madness approaches, college basketball enthusiasts and bettors prepare for the exhilarating chaos of the NCAA Tournament. While player stats, team dynamics, and matchups dominate discussions, one critical factor often flies under the radar: coaching. In the high-stakes, single-elimination format of the tournament, a coach’s experience, strategic acumen, and ability to perform under pressure can tip the scales. This article explores coaching trends—win/loss records, Against The Spread (ATS) performances, over/under tendencies, and first half betting insights—that can sharpen your bracket picks and betting strategies for the 2025 NCAA Tournament.

The Pivotal Role of Coaching in March Madness

Coaching is the backbone of success in the NCAA Tournament. Beyond crafting game plans, coaches must ready their teams for the emotional rollercoaster of a do-or-die environment. A veteran coach can exploit mismatches, adjust on the fly, and keep players composed, often turning close games in their favor. For bettors and bracket pool players, understanding a coach’s historical performance offers a predictive edge, revealing patterns that transcend roster changes.

Win/Loss Records: The Foundation of Tournament Success

A coach’s win/loss record in the NCAA Tournament is a starting point for gauging reliability. Consider Bill Self of Kansas, whose 57-23 record across 80 games underscores his mastery of March. Kansas under Self is a bracket pool staple, boasting a 23-2 first-round record. Similarly, Tom Izzo of Michigan State (56-25) thrives in the tournament’s crucible, making the Spartans a perennial threat.

Contrast this with coaches who falter when it matters most. Chris Jans of Mississippi State has a 1-5 record in six games, while Pat Kelsey of Louisville is 0-4. These struggles signal caution for bettors, especially beyond the first round, where experience often separates contenders from pretenders.

ATS Records: Betting Beyond the Win

For bettors, a coach’s ATS record—whether their team covers the point spread—is gold. ATS betting measures performance against expectations, not just victories. Here’s where the data gets juicy.

Most Profitable ATS Coaches
Dan Hurley of Connecticut tops the charts with a 15-3 ATS record, delivering a 65% return on investment (ROI). UConn’s ability to exceed oddsmakers’ spreads makes Hurley a bettor’s dream. Matt Painter of Purdue follows with a 24-14 ATS record overall and a stellar 12-4 mark in first-round games (47.5% ROI), cementing Purdue as a go-to early-round bet.

Fade Coaches: Betting Against the Spread
On the flip side, some coaches are ATS liabilities. Rick Barnes of Tennessee limps in at 18-28 ATS, yielding a -27.8% ROI. Mark Few of Gonzaga (27-36 ATS) also disappoints, suggesting that while Gonzaga wins, they rarely cover. Fading these coaches—betting against their teams covering the spread—could pad your bankroll.

First-Round ATS Standouts
First-round games offer unique betting opportunities. Beyond Painter’s Purdue, Bill Self (15-8 ATS) and Tom Izzo (14-8 ATS) shine, with ROIs of 27% and 23.6%, respectively. Meanwhile, Michael White of Georgia boasts a perfect 4-0 ATS in four first-round games, a small-sample gem worth watching.

Competitive Games: Thriving in Tight Spots

Games with tight spreads (between +6 and -6) test a coach’s mettle in close contests. Tom Izzo excels here, posting a 30-17 ATS record (+11.3 units), making Michigan State a savvy pick in nail-biters. Matt Painter (14-5 ATS) and Hubert Davis of North Carolina (6-1 ATS) also thrive, with Davis’ 76.7% overall ATS ROI amplifying his appeal.

Conversely, Rick Barnes flounders at 9-19 ATS in competitive games, a -11.9-unit disaster. Randy Bennett of Saint Mary’s (6-10 ATS) similarly underwhelms, suggesting these teams may buckle when the margin is slim.

Large Favorites and Underdogs: Blowouts and Upsets

When teams are heavily favored (by 6+ points), some coaches dominate. Dan Hurley is flawless at 8-0 ATS as a large favorite, while Bill Self (26-18 ATS) and Scott Drew of Baylor (8-3 ATS) reliably deliver blowouts. However, Mark Few (11-18 ATS) and Rick Pitino of St. John’s (7-12 ATS) falter, winning but rarely covering as big favorites.

As large underdogs (6+ points), Dana Altman of Oregon shines with a 6-1 ATS record, making the Ducks a sneaky upset bet. Meanwhile, Tom Izzo (2-5 ATS) struggles in this role, tempering upset expectations for Michigan State.

Over/Under Trends: Total Points Tell a Story

Over/under betting—wagering on whether a game’s total points exceed or fall below a set line—offers another angle. John Scheyer’s Duke teams have gone under in six straight tournament games, a trend echoed by T.J. Otzelberger’s Iowa State (7 of 9 unders) and Tommy Lloyd’s Arizona (6 of 7 unders). These defensive tendencies can guide totals bets, especially in low-scoring slugfests.

First Half Betting: Early Game Edges

First half ATS betting focuses on the opening 20 minutes, revealing coaches who start strong—or stumble. Porter Moser of Oklahoma dazzles with a 7-1 first half ATS record (73.8% ROI), signaling early dominance. Mick Cronin of UCLA (16-10) and Brad Brownell of Clemson (8-3) also impress.

Beware the slow starters: Greg McDermott of Creighton (7-14 ATS) and Tommy Lloyd (1-6 ATS) lag in first halves, offering fade potential for early-game wagers.

Beyond the Numbers: Context Matters

While these trends illuminate coaching tendencies, they’re not foolproof. Rosters evolve, injuries strike, and matchups shift the calculus. A coach like Mark Few might underperform ATS yet win titles, as Gonzaga’s 2021 Final Four run showed (per NCAA archives). Bettors should pair these insights with current team form, KenPom rankings (e.g., adjusted efficiency margins), and situational factors like travel fatigue or crowd noise.

Key Takeaways for 2025

• Bracket Locks: Trust Bill Self, Tom Izzo, and Dan Hurley for deep runs.
• ATS Gems: Bet on Hurley, Painter, and Moser; fade Barnes and Few.
• First-Round Value: Purdue, Kansas, and Georgia offer ATS upside.
• Totals Plays: Lean under with Duke, Iowa State, and Arizona.
• Upset Watch: Oregon as a big underdog could surprise.

Conclusion: Arm Yourself with Coaching Insights

Handicapping the NCAA Tournament is an art, and coaching trends are a vital brushstroke. Whether you’re chasing bracket glory or betting profits, these patterns—rooted in win/loss records, ATS data, over/under streaks, and first half performances—can sharpen your edge. As you dive into March Madness 2025, let the numbers guide you, but stay nimble. After all, in the dance of 68, chaos and brilliance often share the floor.