Ever found youself saying:

"I can't believe that team didn't get into the NCAA Tournament."

Or ...

"How did that team ever get into the dance?"

Well, that's called common sense. And it's something the NCAA selection committee sometimes forgets to use in picking the 34 at-large teams each year.

Here at ESPN.com, however, we've come up with something called the "Common Sense Index". And it's the first formula ESPN.com's Andy Katz and Jay Bilas consider when choosing their NCAA Tournament teams.

Sure, they'll look at the numbers, even glance at an RPI, SOS or maybe another mathematic equation created to figure which teams should and shouldn't be considered at-large candidates. But like any good investigator, they're just as likely to go with their "gut feeling" than some computer's scientific approach.

Supplied with several bubble team's NCAA evidence heading into Championship Week (games through March 9), our CSI: Bristol investigators came up with these conclusions.

Alabama

The Evidence
	W-L: 17-10 SEC: 7-9 Bracketology Seed: 11	RPI: 33 SOS: 21	Last 10: 5-5 R/N: 4-8 Road: 1-8 Non-D-I: 0-0	vs. Top 50: 6-7 vs. 51-100: 5-3 vs. 101-200: 4-0 vs. 201+: 2-0 Source: Insider

Bilas' Case: Please. This team is in the field of 65 already, and there should be little doubt. So what if Alabama had some hiccups shooting the ball and staged their own short-term "pity party"? Over the last five games, the Tide started making shots again, and has shown that an NCAA bid is deserved. If the field shrinks to 48 teams somehow, then Alabama might be on the bubble. Otherwise, my basketball sense says to quit wasting time talking about Alabama being in or out, and go on to seeding. Alabama's shooting inconsistencies may be reason not to pick the Tide in an early NCAA matchup, but the Tide will roll into the field. Book it.
Verdict: IN

Katz's Case: The Tide keep making it harder to justify receiving a bid, but it did play well enough early in the season. Judged on their overall body of work, the Tide should get into the NCAAs. They have the goods to be a team that could win on neutral court. They've got the talent inside and out and have had the look of a tournament team. Verdict: IN

Auburn

The Evidence
	W-L: 19-10 SEC: 8-8 Bracketology Seed: OUT	RPI:39 SOS: 39	Last 10: 4-6 R/N: 5-6 Road: 3-5 Non-D-I: 1-0	vs. Top 50: 2-8 vs. 51-100: 7-2 vs. 101-200: 4-0 vs. 201+: 5-0 Source: Insider

Bilas' Case: A great player in Marquis Daniels and a great conference in the SEC make Auburn look good. But this team has only two quality wins, and the weak non-conference slate gives me pause. The Tigers have been feasting on cupcakes all season and the record is fat in places. However, this is a pretty darn good team that just hasn't been able to get over the hump -- at least when I have been watching. Auburn beats the teams it should beat, but struggles against really good teams, and has looked non-competitive in some games. Yes, Auburn is a good team, but good enough for an NCAA bid? It is a close call.
Verdict: OUT

Katz's Case: The Tigers finished ahead of Alabama and LSU. A team leap-frogging another ahead of it in the standings does happen on Selection Sunday, but it's not common. Auburn could, however, be a victim of such a scenario this year. Don't be surprised if the Tigers get snubbed and those Tigers from Louisiana go dancing. But, my gut feeling is that these Tigers will get a bid for finishing tied for second in the SEC West. Verdict: IN

Arizona State

The Evidence
	W-L: 19-10 Pac-10: 11-7 Bracketology Seed: 10	RPI: 33 SOS: 19	Last 10: 6-4 R/N: 6-7 Road: 4-6 Non-D-I: 1-0	vs. Top 50: 3-8 vs. 51-100: 1-1 vs. 101-200: 10-1 vs. 201+: 4-0 Source: Insider

Bilas' Case: I have liked this team since Maui, but Arizona State's record does not reflect how good this squad can be. The Sun Devils are athletic, have a great post presence in Diogu, and can rebound and defend pretty well. This is not a good shooting team, but one that can get hot and make some shots. I think Arizona State is a good team, and my basketball sense says to put them into the field, based upon their play, and the competition they face on the bubble.
Verdict: IN

Katz's Case: The Sun Devils should be in the tournament. ASU has had the look of a tournament team with their balanced scoring, finished strong in the Pac-10 and have the best freshman in the league in Ike Diogu. ASU had to beat Oregon to feel more secure. The Sun Devils did. Verdict: IN

Butler

The Evidence
	W-L: 25-4 Horzn: 15-2 Bracketology Seed: 9	RPI: 35 SOS: 163	Last 10: 9-1 R/N: 13-4 Road: 10-4 Non-D-I: 1-0	vs. Top 50: 2-2 vs. 51-100: 3-1 vs. 101-200: 8-1 vs. 201+: 11-0 Source: Insider

Bilas' Case: My gut tells me that Butler should get in, win or lose the Horizon tournament. I like Butler's style of play, spreading the floor and playing Joel Cornette out on the perimeter where he can make plays. The Bulldogs can hang with some of the best in the country. Butler and Southern Illinois out of the MVC are two of the strongest mid-major teams this season, but the Bulldogs have performed better against common opponents than the Salukis. Still, having watched both over the season, my gut tells me that Southern Illlinois is better. Still, I like Butler to win the Horizon League automatic bid, but it won't matter. These Bulldogs should get an at-large nod from the committee after getting snubbed last season.
Verdict: IN

Katz's Case: The Bulldogs should have been in the field last season but got snubbed. Winning 25 games this season was impressive and deserves a chance at a bid. But the gut says they'll get snubbed again if they don't win the Horizon tournament. Verdict: OUT

Central Michigan

The Evidence
	W-L: 21-6 MAC: 14-4 Bracketology Seed: OUT	RPI: 49 SOS: 147	Last 10: 9-1 R/N: 9-5 Road: 9-5 Non-D-I: 1-0	vs. Top 50: 0-0 vs. 51-100: 3-3 vs. 101-200: 14-3 vs. 201+: 3-0 Source: Insider

Bilas' Case: A very sound team, Central Michigan has one of the best big men in the country in Chris Kaman, who can light you up for big numbers due to his skill and savvy. Mike Manciel is a nice player, and this is a well coached squad that beat Michigan early in the season. If the field were to expand to 75 teams, my basketball sense would have this team in the mix, but I think Central Michigan falls just out of contention for an NCAA bid this season without winning the MAC tournament.
Verdict: OUT

Katz's Case: The Chippewas are good enough to get a bid. Chris Kaman is one of the best big men in the country, but Central Michigan doesn't have the résumé to get in as an at-large berth. Central Michigan has had a terrific season, but once again, the MAC teams beat each other up too much to compete with a deep at-large pool of talent. Verdict: OUT

Colorado

The Evidence
	W-L: 19-10 Big 12: 9-7 Bracketology Seed: 10	RPI: 42 SOS: 51	Last 10: 7-3 R/N: 5-9 Road: 3-9 Non-D-I: 0-0	vs. Top 50: 4-5 vs. 51-100: 7-2 vs. 101-200: 3-3 vs. 201+: 5-0 Source: Insider

Bilas' Case: The Buffaloes have great talent, especially up front, with David Harrison, Stephane Pelle and Blair Wilson. Colorado also has a scorer in Michel Morandis. It has beaten some heavyweights at home, which by itself tells anyone with basketball brains that this team is capable of winning an NCAA Tournament game. However, my basketball sense also tells me that Colorado is not the same team away from home, and that the Buffaloes sometimes forget to pack some fight and intensity when leaving Boulder. Getting blown out on the road gives me pause, but my basketball sense tells me that Colorado should squeak in over some teams that haven't scratched as many times at home or on the road.
Verdict: IN

Katz's Case: The Buffaloes have one of the best frontcourts in the country in David Harrison and Stephane Pelle. There was a time when Colorado wasn't certain where it would be playing in the postseason, but the Buffs deserve to be in the NCAAs after beating Kansas, Texas and Missouri at home -- and winning at least once on the road in the Big 12. This team is strong enough upon inspection to earn an NCAA bid. Verdict: IN

Gonzaga

The Evidence
	W-L: 22-7 WCC: 12-2 Bracketology Seed: 10	RPI: 38 SOS: 98	Last 10: 8-2 R/N: 13-5 Road: 10-1 Non-D-I: 0-0	vs. Top 50: 1-5 vs. 51-100: 4-0 vs. 101-200: 8-0 vs. 201+: 9-2 Source: Insider

Bilas' Case: No brainer. The Zags are in, period. Anyone who will tell you that Gonzaga is not a Tournament team this year is in need of immediate medical attention. The Zags are big, skilled and have Blake Stepp, another in a long line of hotshot guards who can shoot the ball and play with savvy. Rony Turiaf and Corey Violette are pros with big bodies and games, and Gonzaga has depth. This is a different Gonzaga team, one that is more inside oriented. My gut tells me that this team will go, automatic bid or not.
Verdict: IN

Katz's Case: The Bulldogs played a strong schedule and did have a significant win over North Carolina State in the Jimmy V Classic, as well as Utah in Maui. Sure, they lost to Kentucky, Stanford and Saint Joseph's ... but the Bulldogs are a talented enough team to win games in the NCAAs. They deserve to go, even if they lose in the WCC tournament. Verdict: IN

Indiana

The Evidence
	W-L: 18-11 Big Ten: 8-8 Bracketology Seed: 11	RPI: 43 SOS: 45	Last 10: 4-6 R/N: 7-10 Road: 2-9 Non-D-I: 0-0	vs. Top 50: 4-7 vs. 51-100: 7-1 vs. 101-200: 5-3 vs. 201+: 2-0 Source: Insider

Bilas' Case: The Hoosiers were off of the bubble in November after winning the Maui Invitational and then beating Maryland in a December thriller. Sure the Hoosiers have struggled shooting the ball at times, but there are not 34 better at-large teams out there. Jeffrey Newton is capable of being more efficient inside, which helps free up shooters on the perimeter. Only Bracey Wright can get his own shot, but when Tom Coverdale and Kyle Hornsby get open looks with time, the three-point line will win Indiana a game or two in the NCAA Turnament, depending upon the matchups. Relax, my basketball sense says that Indiana is in.
Verdict: IN

Katz's Case: The Hoosiers won enough games early and picked up a few quality Big Ten wins. Indiana has had that tournament look, but other times they have looked too ordinary, even downright awful. But Indiana will likely get into the Dance because of their non-conference record and their strength in numbers. Verdict: IN

LSU

The Evidence
	W-L: 19-9 SEC: 8-8 Bracketology Seed: 9	RPI: 41 SOS: 62	Last 10: 7-3 R/N: 3-7 Road: 3-6 Non-D-I: 0-0	vs. Top 50: 5-6 vs. 51-100: 4-3 vs. 101-200: 6-0 vs. 201+: 4-0 Source: Insider

Bilas' Case: The Tigers have talent, and have been shooting the blood out of the ball lately. When LSU makes shots, they can beat almost anybody. Ronald Dupree is underrated and a special athlete; Torris Bright is experienced and can hit the deep ball, and Jaime Lloreda is tough inside when he wants to be. Yes, LSU is fickle and unpredictable on the offensive end, but the SEC is one tough conference and can make you look bad when you're not. Take LSU off the board and put the Tigers in the bracket. I would take these Tigers over those from Auburn every time.
Verdict: IN

Katz's Case: The Tigers needed to beat Alabama to stay on track for a bid. But the Tigers are still a work in progress. LSU has the win over Arizona and that should be something that helps its case in the selection process. But LSU has to win a game or two more to feel secure about getting a bid -- which ultimately the Tigers are good enough to do in New Orleans next week. Verdict: IN

Manhattan

The Evidence
	W-L: 22-6 MAAC: 15-4 Bracketology Seed: OUT	RPI: 58 SOS: 191	Last 10: 7-3 R/N: 15-4 Road: 11-3 Non-D-I: 0-0	vs. Top 50: 1-1 vs. 51-100: 5-2 vs. 101-200: 8-3 vs. 201+: 11-1 Source: Insider

Bilas' Case: This is a really solid team and the Jaspers are fun to watch. Bobby Gonzalez has his club playing with passion and enthusiasm, but the real reason I like this team is because of Luis Flores. This kid is a pure scorer and he has all kinds of shake to his game. Manhattan may be the best team in New York this year, but that won't get you a bid. As much as I like to watch the Jaspers, they only go dancing if they win the MAAC tournament. It isn't fair, but that's the way it is.
Verdict: OUT

Katz's Case: The Jaspers have to win the MAAC tournament. Beating Seton Hall and St. John's isn't going to wow the committee. Manhattan is a nice, balanced team in the MAAC. But the Jaspers aren't at-large material. Verdict: OUT

Michigan State

The Evidence
	W-L: 18-11 Big Ten: 10-6 Bracketology Seed: 8	RPI: 34 SOS: 15	Last 10: 7-3 R/N: 4-9 Road: 3-6 Non-D-I: 0-0	vs. Top 50: 5-6 vs. 51-100: 4-3 vs. 101-200: 7-2 vs. 201+: 2-0 Source: Insider

Bilas' Case: Everything you need to know about the Spartans' NCAA chances can be summed up in one tidy little sentence. Michigan State won at Rupp. Talk all you want about how the Spartans do not sprint out in transition the way they did a couple of years ago, and how Michigan State sometimes handles the ball and turns it over like it's a hand grenade with the pin pulled out. But this is a good team that can beat any team it matches up with during the first week of the NCAA Tournament. Michigan State is still tough and hard-nosed. The Spartans are starting to look like they should have earlier, if not for the rash of injuries. This is an NCAA Tournament team. Book it.
Verdict: IN

Katz's Case: The Spartans own a victory over Kentucky. That weighs heavily in the selection committee's mind. Beating the top team in the field will help their case. The common sense is that the Spartans have done enough to get a bid, even if they have been erratic on the road. Verdict: IN

Minnesota

The Evidence
	W-L: 16-11 Big Ten: 8-8 Bracketology Seed: OUT	RPI: 63 SOS: 56	Last 10: 5-5 R/N: 2-8 Road: 2-8 Non-D-I: 0-0	vs. Top 50: 3-7 vs. 51-100: 2-3 vs. 101-200: 8-1 vs. 201+: 3-0 Source: Insider

Bilas' Case: The Gophers are big, but cannot rebound the ball. Minnesota is talented, but not particularly tough. Dan Monson has done a really solid job with a program that was rock bottom when he took over, and has instilled some pride back into Williams Arena, but the Gophers are still a year away. Rick Rickert is a skilled big man that can really play on the offensive end, and I love Mo Hargrove, but this team doesn't rebound and defend well enough to satisfy my Common Sense Index.
Verdict: OUT

Katz's Case: The Gophers were hurt by the Big Ten schedule. They had to go on the road to finish against Indiana and Illinois. That didn't help their case. The Gophers are a hard sell and will have to earn the bid by winning a game or two in the Big Ten tourney. If they don't then they're off to the NIT and will miss the dance for the second straight year after such a promising start. Verdict: OUT

North Carolina State

The Evidence
	W-L: 16-11 ACC: 9-7 Bracketology Seed: 11	RPI: 62 SOS: 57	Last 10: 4-6 R/N: 3-8 Road: 3-7 Non-D-I: 0-0	vs. Top 50: 1-7 vs. 51-100: 9-2 vs. 101-200: 1-1 vs. 201+: 5-1 Source: Insider

Bilas' Case: This is an NCAA-calilber team. The truth is this would be a no brainer if Ilian Evtimov had not gotten hurt. Herb Sendek lost a playmaker when Evtimov went down, and one of his most versatile passers and handlers. Without him, N.C. State is a good team, but clearly not great. State has good athletes, but not great ones. The Pack can shoot the ball, but are streaky. My basketball sense tells me that N.C. State should be selected over some of the other bubble teams because nine wins in the ACC should be enough in almost any year to gain a bid. However, State having fallen short in a few games, like against Maryland and Wake Forest, makes my gut churn about the committee. State should concentrate on winning two in the ACC Tournament.
Verdict: IN

Katz's Case: The Wolfpack is a hard sell. They didn't finish off the way they needed to by losing to Wake Forest. But the Wolfpack did still win nine games in the ACC. That should carry some weight with the committee. Don't be surprised if the Wolfpack get in based on their conference affiliation. Verdict: IN

Seton Hall

The Evidence
	W-L: 16-11 Big East: 10-6 Bracketology Seed: 12	RPI: 36 SOS: 9	Last 10: 8-2 R/N: 3-8 Road: 3-7 Non-D-I: 0-0	vs. Top 50: 2-6 vs. 51-100: 3-5 vs. 101-200: 7-0 vs. 201+: 4-0 Source: Insider

Bilas' Case: I want to like Seton Hall, and against Pittsburgh and Notre Dame, I certainly did. But the Pirates are missing some key ingredients to being a clear-cut NCAA team. Andre Barrett does a nice job of running the point and can make shots, and John Allen can score the ball from the wing. But the Hall is suspect defensively and on the glass. The Hall doesn't shoot it particularly well and does not do anything to set itself apart from the crowd. This is a pretty good team that has been on a roll against some other comparable teams. But my basketball sense says that Seton Hall will be playing in the NIT.
Verdict: OUT

Katz's Case: Just winning Big East games isn't enough to get a bid. Seton Hall had a nice run but, the gut says the Pirates have fallen short in their quest. The Pirates fate was sealed by getting blown out by Pittsburgh and losing at Providence. Seton Hall needed to do more in the non-conference. It can still do more in the Big East tournament to change my mind -- not to mention the committee's. Verdict: OUT

Southern Illinois

The Evidence
	W-L: 24-5 MVC: 18-2 Bracketology Seed: 9	RPI: 37 SOS: 144	Last 10: 9-1 R/N: 10-5 Road: 10-5 Non-D-I: 0-0	vs. Top 50: 1-2 vs. 51-100: 2-2 vs. 101-200: 10-1 vs. 201+: 11-0 Source: Insider

Bilas' Case: This team should be in the field of 65. The Salukis don't have the inside presence they had last year, but this is a really good team that has good guards and some developing freshman who are better contributors now than early in the season. Kent Williams is a tough kid who can really shoot it. He won't be a pro, but he's a hell of a college player who will be causing people fits at the YMCA lunchtime games until he's in his 40s. Jermaine Dearman is athletic, can run the floor and gets off of his feet. Southern Illinois is not afraid of anyone. While Creighton has gotten all of the mid-major attention this year, this team is just as dangerous. I saw Southern Illinois early in the season and have watched the Salukis several times on tape. My gut says put 'em in.
Verdict: IN

Katz's Case: The Salukis won the Missouri Valley Conference regular season. That's good enough for me to give 'em a bid. If Southern Illinois gets snubbed, it would be worse then Butler getting denied last season. Southern Illinois is a good enough team to be in the field. There's no question this team can win a game, if not get back to the Sweet 16 like last year's Salukis. Verdict: IN

Texas Tech

The Evidence
	W-L: 16-11 Big 12: 6-10 Bracketology Seed: OUT	RPI: 48 SOS: 43	Last 10: 4-6 R/N: 6-7 Road: 6-6 Non-D-I: 0-0	vs. Top 50: 2-7 vs. 51-100: 6-3 vs. 101-200: 5-1 vs. 201+: 3-0 Source: Insider

Bilas' Case: The Red Raiders are in this discussion for one reason, and one reason only: Bob Knight's coaching. The Raiders have inconsistent guard play, spotty rebounding, and average free throw shooting. But I watch this team a lot, and there is no way they would be in contention for a bid absent Knight. Texas Tech has quality wins over Oklahoma State and Minnesota on the road, has been in every game played, but lost 10 of 16 in the Big 12. The loss at Baylor may have pointed Tech toward the NIT, and Knight's coaching won't change the committee's mind. Texas Tech can still beat a team or two in the Big 12 tournament. Say what you will, but my basketball sense tells me that Texas Tech should get in, but losing to Baylor may prevent that from happening.
Verdict: OUT

Katz's Case: Getting the Red Raiders a bid is hard to justify. They've lost too many games of late. The last team to finish 6-10 in conference play and earn a bid was Florida State out of the ACC in 1998. Tech is a talented team and looks like a tournament team at times with the win at Oklahoma State and the early-season win at Minnesota. But Texas Tech wasn't consistent enough to become an NCAA team and will likely be in the NIT. Verdict: OUT

UNLV

The Evidence
	W-L: 19-9 MWC: 8-6 Bracketology Seed: OUT	RPI: 44 SOS: 70	Last 10: 7-3 R/N: 6-5 Road: 6-5 Non-D-I: 0-0	vs. Top 50: 1-5 vs. 51-100: 6-2 vs. 101-200: 8-2 vs. 201+: 4-0 Source: Insider

Bilas' Case: With their athleticism, UNLV can beat teams, but the Rebels have been inconsistent, especially shooting the ball and on the defensive end. Dalron Johnson is a good scorer and can rebound when the spirit moves him. Marcus Banks is UNLV's best player, and does a great job of putting pressure on the ball at the point of attack. When Banks is pressuring the ball, the wings can extend and really guard people. That is great in theory, but UNLV has to put it into practice. UNLV does not consistently attempt to stop people, rather, the Rebels simply want to outscore opponents on the offensive end. Defend them and rebound, and you can beat UNLV. Allow them to get into their comfort zone and rhythm, and you will have a long game. Going with my hoop sense, UNLV should be in the NIT.
Verdict: OUT

Katz's Case: The Rebels have no chance to get an at-large bid. We don't want to hear about the RPI. The Runnin' Rebels simply don't have the quality wins to get into the NCAAs. They don't look like an NCAA Tournament team. Sure, they could win the MWC tournament. But they haven't done enough to distinguish themselves this season. Verdict: OUT

Weber State

The Evidence
	W-L: 24-5 Big West: 14-0 Bracketology Seed: 12	RPI: 45 SOS: 197	Last 10: 10-0 R/N: 13-4 Road: 9-3 Non-D-I: 1-1	vs. Top 50: 1-1 vs. 51-100: 0-1 vs. 101-200: 8-1 vs. 201+: 14-1 Source: Insider

Bilas' Case: Watch out for these guys. Not only does Weber State have a history of taking out big shots in the first round, like North Carolina and Michigan State, but this team is tough minded and very solid. Jermaine Boyette has been terrifying the Big Sky for three years now, and he's hardly known outside of Utah (that's where Weber State is, by the way). Without a Big Sky Tournament title, this team should get in, because it can really play. However, put N.C. State or Texas Tech in the Big Sky, and we'd be saying the same thing.
Verdict: IN

Katz's Case: Sweeping through the Big Sky is significant and so is the win over BYU. Weber State should get an at-large berth if it doesn't win the Big Sky tourney. Well, that's what common sense says. What the selection committee says may not agree with me, since Weber State has been playing in obscurity all season. Verdict: IN

Wyoming

The Evidence
	W-L: 20-9 MWC: 8-6 Bracketology Seed: OUT	RPI: 55 SOS: 83	Last 10: 4-6 R/N: 8-6 Road: 5-5 Non-D-I: 1-0	vs. Top 50: 3-5 vs. 51-100: 3-3 vs. 101-200: 8-1 vs. 201+: 5-0 Source: Insider

Bilas' Case: The injury to Marcus Bailey really hurt this team, and sent the Cowboys into the ranks of the "solid but not too far from ordinary" category. Because Utah and BYU are virtual locks out of the Mountain West, and because Wyoming has not had enough signature wins, the committee isn't going to be impressed enough to give the Pokes the benifit of the doubt. But, I still wouldn't want to play Wyoming at altitude. With Marcus Bailey, this is a tournament team. Without him, my basketball sense tells me the Cowboys will fall short.
Verdict: OUT

Katz's Case: The Cowboys just don't have the résumé to get into the NCAA Tournament. The Cowboys didn't win the big games in the Mountain West to convince me that they deserve an at-large berth. The selection committee might give them some love for losing the conference's preseason player of the year candidate Marcus Bailey to a knee injury, but don't expect that to be enough to get them in the Dance. Verdict: OUT