NEW YORK -- If the majority of bracket projections are to be believed, Nebraska is on the verge of joining a small club it wants no affiliation with.

Only two times in the history of the expanded NCAA Tournament (since 1985) has a major conference team won at least 13 games in its league and failed to get an at-large bid. Both of those cases not only happened in the same year (2012) but happened in the same conference (Pac-12). 

Those two teams -- Washington and Oregon -- also lost their first conference tournament game back in 2012. The same is true of Nebraska (22-10), which went 13-5 in the Big Ten regular season but took a morale-deflating 77-58 loss at the hands of Michigan on Friday. Unfortunately for the Cornhuskers, this also means they are in jeopardy of making Big Ten history by being the first team ever to win 12 or more games in that league and be shuttled to the NIT. 

"It's not the history I want to make," NU coach Tim Miles told CBS Sports. 

Only twice (Illinois in 1991 and Ohio State in 2016) has a Big Ten team won 11 games and not earned an at-large. In an era when the selection committee has often eschewed selecting compelling mid-major teams in favor of power-conference programs with more opportunities to pick up good wins, Nebraska might be made an example of in year one of the Quadrant Era.

Our bracketology expert Jerry Palm doesn't give Nebraska much of a chance. 

"Nebraska's overall resume is pretty similar except their win over Michigan is better," Palm said here at Madison Square Garden, in comparing Nebraska of this year to Washington in 2012.

But the situations are flipped. The Pac-12 had one top-60 team that season. The Big Ten has six in the top 60 now. 

But before putting dirt of the Huskers' grave, let's look at how Nebraska got to this point because I think there are lessons here to be learned and distinctions to be made by the committee. We'll start with the Big Ten. It's worth pointing out how the Cornhuskers will probably be a victim of bad timing and uncontrollable scheduling as much as anything else. (There are other reasons too, but let's start with this.)

The Cornhuskers happened to be a good Big Ten team in a down Big Ten year. Coaches in the league will expectedly spar with the notion that the Big Ten is down, but empirical data and mainstream metrics do not lie. The conference ranks fifth in KenPom and Sagarin. That is good but not top-tier. The Big Ten does not stack up to the Big 12, Big East or ACC this season. Nebraska's 13-5 record is a double-edged sword. The Huskers were not afforded home games against the best teams in their league, robbing them of quadrant one opportunities. They played Michigan State, Purdue and Ohio State once apiece, all on the road, and lost each time. Nebraska was non-competitive at MSU (86-57), lost by 12 at Purdue (74-62) and couldn't quite steal one against the Buckeyes (64-59).

The fact Nebraska finished fourth in the Big Ten is immaterial to its standing with the committee. And although this discussion won't had used by the committee, one could argue that Nebraska only finished fourth in the league because it did not have to play MSU, Ohio State or Purdue twice. Had it played a tougher league schedule, Nebraska could easily have tallied more losses and not even been on the bubble to begin with. 

Nebraska could not control its Big Ten slate. It's not right, it's not wrong, it's just how it is and it's a scar the team must bear. NU rallied late in the season, winning eight of 10, but late-season performance isn't a factor. And beyond that, the league wasn't going to rise the tide for all boats. 

So here's the issue with the Cornhuskers and something that every coach in a major conference should consider going forward: Your league can hurt you as much as it can help you, and how you schedule in non-conference is paramount to building your seeding/selection case. This may seem obvious, but Nebraska's predicament proves that conference performance cannot, and sometimes will not, save you. 

Prior to Nebraska's loss on Friday, only eight of 80-plus entries on the always-valuable BracketMatrix.com had Nebraska in the field. The biggest reason for this is Nebraska's lack of Quadrant 1 victories. The quadrant system is a new tinker to the team sheets for the selection committee. A Quadrant 1 result is defined by a game that is played at home against an RPI opponent ranked 1-30; a neutral game vs. a team whose RPI is 1-50; and a road game against a RPI team in the 1-75 echelon. 

"At the end of the day, if Quad 1 is the holy grail, that's a tough deal," Miles said. "But I don't think Quad 1 is the holy grail. There's tough wins in Quad 3."

We can quibble with the RPI but the fact remains that it is still the metric being used to build out team-sheet data and is how the quadrants are separated. Nebraska entered Friday with a 54 RPI. That number should dip following its loss. Its Quadrant 1 record is 1-6. Quadrant 2? Nebraska is 2-3. 

Forebodingly, 10 of Nebraska's 22 wins are in Quadrant 4. 

That is a strain running through the Huskers' tournament profile, accentuated by two scheduling decisions that continue to bruise Nebraska's numbers. Miles opted to schedule home games against Delaware State and Stetson during the Christmas holiday. Stetson has eight wins vs. D-I opponents. Delaware State has only two -- and it ranks as the second-worst team in the sport at KenPom.com. Last season, those teams ranked across the board as Quadrant 4-level competition. There is no compelling reason for a Big Ten school to ever schedule a team who ranks in the 300s. Those games metabolize to empty calories on the résumé every. single. time. 

Had Miles chosen to schedule top-tier teams from the MAC, Ohio Valley or Summit League, Nebraska not only would have a better RPI number, but it would have less noise in the murky waters of quadrant 4. Scheduling decisions made months ago will haunt the Huskers for the next nine days. I asked Miles if he agreed that Stetson and Delaware State could in part doom his team's chances.

"They could," Miles said. "We played two Conference USA teams that aren't helping us as bit. They're killing us."

Those teams would be North Texas and UTSA, both of which are Quadrant 4 wins. 

Miles had a great line when asked what he would have done differently with this season, and scheduling, in retrospect.

"I might have switched a screen against Kansas," he said. "That would have made me feel a hell of a lot better."

Nebraska lost 73-72 at home against the Jayhawks on Dec. 16. The small things can have huge impact, be it a scribbling a screen on a whiteboard or taking a call from Delaware State. If Nebraska has that win over Kansas, its NCAA Tournament fate is much more of a toss-up and arguably the most compelling debate in the week-plus building to Selection Sunday.

And of course, the way Nebraska ended Big Ten play is also problematic. A 19-point loss on a neutral court is not leaving a good impression. Miles finished by playing walk-ons in the final minute Friday. Bruce Rasmussen, who is an athletic director in the state of Nebraska and serving as chair of the selection committee, was in Madison Square Garden on Friday. The Cornhuskers did not state their case for the better. 

What's at play here is an interesting philosophical debate that coaches probably need to atone for. The fact that Nebraska played three really bad opponents (Marist is also a wart) doesn't speak to how strong or weak NU is. But nonetheless, the fact that it scheduled those games is part of why Nebraska could secure a top seed in the NIT. 

"We just missed on [a couple teams]," Miles said. "Like, Eastern Illinois -- how good are they? They were supposed to be the best team they've had. They play us to four, they got to Marquette in overtime."

Eastern Illinois is 12-19.

The committee frequently sends messages in seeding and selection, like who you schedule in non-conference matters. If you beef up your win total with buy games, you're not only not going to be rewarded for that, but it could be held against you. 

Nebraska last danced in 2014, its only appearance in the past 20 years. Now a nine-day wait begins. Some inside the Nebraska program feel like if "BUTLER" or "INDIANA" was on the jersey, more people would be giving this team a shot. Instead, the likely outcome is that a major conference team will be judged like on a mid-major's scale. Nebraska has little wiggle room in Quadrant 1. Twenty-two wins and power-league alliances probably can't overcome a 1-6 record against the best competition it's faced. 

And when you're Nebraska, it's hard to believe you'll be afforded the benefit of the doubt.