OK, I've done some research today to see just how many teams from the big-six conferences have reached double digit league wins and not made the NCAA tournament.

Here's what I came up with. This list is since the NCAA expanded the field to 64 teams in 1985:

ACC

• None

Big East

• 1991-92 — Villanova 11-7 Big East (14-15 overall)
• 1993-94 — Villanova 10-8 Big East (20-12 overall)
• 1996-97 — Pittsburgh 10-8 Big East (18-15 overall)
• 1996-97 — West Virginia 11-7 Big East (21-10 overall)
• 2006-07 — Syracuse 10-6 Big East (24-11 overall)

Big Ten

• 2002-03 — Michigan 10-6 Big Ten (17-13 overall)
• 2007-08 — Ohio State 10-8 Big Ten (24-13 overall)

Big 12 (since conference was formed in 1996-97)

• 1998-99 — Nebraska 10-6 Big 12 (20-13 overall)
• 2003-04 — Colorado 10-6 Big 12 (18-11 overall)
• 2006-07 — Kansas State 10-6 Big 12 (23-12 overall)

Pac-10

• 1985-86 — California 11-7 Pac-10 (19-10 overall)
• 1986-87 — Washington 10-8 Pac-10 (20-15 overall)
• 1986-87 — California 10-8 Pac-10 (20-15 overall)
• 1986-87 — Oregon State 10-8 Pac-10 (19-11 overall)
• 1987-88 — Stanford 11-7 Pac-10 (21-12 overall)
• 1987-88 — Oregon 10-8, Pac-10 (16-14 overall)
• 1988-89 — California 10-8 Pac-10 (20-13 overall)
• 1989-90 — Oregon 10-8 Pac-10 (15-14 overall)
• 1992-93 — Arizona State 11-7 Pac-10 (18-10 overall)
• 1993-94 — Stanford 10-8 Pac-10 (17-11 overall)
• 1993-94 — Arizona State 10-8 Pac-10 (15-13 overall)
• 1994-95 — Washington State 10-8 Pac-10 (18-12 overall)
• 1996-97 — Washington 10-8 Pac-10 (17-11 overall)
• 1999-00 — Arizona State 10-8 Pac-10 (19-13 overall)
• 2005-06 — Stanford 11-7 Pac-10 (16-14 overall)
• 2006-07 — Stanford 10-8 Pac-10 (18-3 overall)

SEC

• 1985-86 — Florida 10-8 SEC (19-14 overall)
• 1989-90 — Tennessee 10-8 SEC (16-14 overall)
  

Now, keep in mind that many of these examples are not exactly the same. The SEC plays a 16-game schedule this year, and most of the team listed played 18-game league schedules. Also note that most of the time, the team in question did not have very many overall wins.

However, there are two great examples in this group that compare well to Auburn's situation this year, and they both come from the 2006-07 season. The teams: Syracuse and Kansas State.

(Keep in mind Auburn's current numbers: 20-10 Division I record, RPI: 64, SOS: 69, 2-5 vs. RPI top-50.)

Kansas State was 22-11 heading into the postseason, with an RPI of 64, a strength of schedule of 79 and a 2-5 record against the RPI top-50. Plus, that was a particularly down year for the Big 12, which ranked fifth in overall conference RPI and got only three teams into the NCAA tournament.

Syracuse had a 22-10 record heading into the postseason, with an RPI of 46, a strength of schedule of 51 and a 3-6 record against teams in the RPI top-50. The Orange was similar to the Tigers in that it was playing excellent basketball at the end of the year, with six wins in its final eight regular season games. One of those wins was against No. 10 Georgetown. The 'Cuse also made the Big East tournament quarterfinals.

But like Kansas State, Syracuse might have been a victim of its relatively weak conference, which ranked sixth in overall RPI that year (though the Big East still got six of its 16 teams in the Big Dance). Coach Jim Boeheim, as you might imagine, was not pleased at the time.

What does it all mean? Well, who knows, really. Obviously, every year is different, with upset automatic qualifiers from the smaller conferences deciding the fate of teams on the bubble more than anything.

What this does show is that Auburn's situation, while not common, is also not unprecedented.