Polymarket

Gonzaga Favored on Polymarket as Longhorns Seek Another March Madness Upset

The Polymarket prediction market for the NCAA Tournament clash between the Texas Longhorns and Gonzaga Bulldogs shows Gonzaga as a strong favorite, reflecting traditional sports betting lines and expert analytics, despite Texas's recent upset victories.

Admin

— 3 min read

The high-stakes NCAA Men's Basketball Tournament continues to captivate, and a significant second-round matchup between the Texas Longhorns and the Gonzaga Bulldogs has drawn considerable attention on Polymarket. With a substantial trading volume of $2,246,364, the market currently prices the Gonzaga Bulldogs at 0.685, implying a 68.5% chance of victory, while the Texas Longhorns sit at 0.315, or a 31.5% implied probability. This market will resolve to the winning team in the game scheduled for March 21 at 7:10 PM ET, with provisions for postponement or cancellation.

This West Region showdown pits the No. 11 seed Texas Longhorns against the No. 3 seed Gonzaga Bulldogs at the Moda Center in Portland, Oregon. Texas enters the contest with significant momentum, having already pulled off two upset victories in the tournament. The Longhorns (20-14) advanced to the second round by defeating No. 6 seed BYU 79-71, with sophomore center Matas Vokietaitis delivering a standout performance of 23 points and 16 rebounds. This followed a nail-biting 68-66 win over NC State in the First Four, showcasing a Texas team that appears to be peaking at the opportune moment.

Conversely, the Gonzaga Bulldogs (31-3) secured their spot in the Round of 32 with a 73-64 victory over No. 14 seed Kennesaw State. While a win is a win, Gonzaga's performance was described by some as a "poor offensive night," with the team struggling from beyond the arc, shooting a "measly 17% from the 3-point line." Despite this, Graham Ike led the Bulldogs with 19 points, and Davis Fogle added 17 off the bench. Gonzaga boasts an impressive tournament history, making 27 straight appearances and reaching the 30-win mark for the ninth time in program history.

Analysis of the Polymarket odds reveals a clear lean towards Gonzaga as the favorite, aligning closely with traditional sports betting markets. Major sportsbooks list Gonzaga's moneyline between -225 and -254, which translates to an implied probability of approximately 69% to 71%. Texas, as the underdog, is typically offered at moneyline odds ranging from +185 to +202. ESPN Analytics further reinforces this sentiment, giving Gonzaga a 74.8% chance of victory, while another prediction market, Kalshi, shows Gonzaga at 70% and Texas at 32%.

Expert opinions highlight several key factors. VSiN suggests that Gonzaga's potent offense is well-equipped to exploit what they describe as a "weak Texas defense," with Graham Ike expected to dominate around the basket. They also note Texas's struggles with applying pressure and forcing turnovers. Covers.com experts, who also favor Gonzaga, point to the Bulldogs' "elite defensive group" facing a "somewhat fatigued" Texas squad playing its third tournament game in five days, alongside Texas's 348th-ranked turnover defense. However, Sportsbook Review, while predicting a Gonzaga win (74-72), still recommends betting on Texas to cover the +5.5 point spread, citing Texas's momentum and Gonzaga's difficult preparation for a different opponent than Kennesaw State.

Historically, the head-to-head record shows a competitive past, with Texas defeating Gonzaga 93-74 in their last encounter, and Gonzaga winning two of the last three matchups. The Polymarket reflects a consensus among experts and traditional oddsmakers: Gonzaga is the more likely victor, but Texas's recent form suggests they are a dangerous underdog capable of another upset.

Sources:

Market data fetched at 2026-03-20 18:16 UTC | Polymarket ID: 1659161

This article is generated by AI for informational purposes only. It does not constitute financial advice. Always do your own research before making any investment decisions. Data sourced from Polymarket and public web sources.

Read more