
Florida vs Lehigh prediction and matchup analysis
Florida vs Lehigh is a Round of 64 game in the South Region of the 2026 NCAA Tournament. The current projected score is Florida 92, Lehigh 58. Compare seed, NET rank, KenPom efficiency, injuries, player leaders, and notable wins to evaluate both teams.
Predictions
Review the projected final score, expected total, risk factors, and historical context for this NCAA Tournament matchup.
Explanation
- Florida owns the clean top-end profile edge: No. 1 seed, NET 4, KenPom 4, adjusted offense rank 9, adjusted defense rank 6, and a 12-6 Quad 1 record. Lehigh is a No. 16 seed with NET 275, KenPom 284, and no Quad 1 or Quad 2 wins.
- The physical gap is large. Florida averages 45.4 rebounds per game to Lehigh's 31.9, and the Gators carried a plus-13.5 rebounding margin during their late-season surge.
- Lehigh's offense is good enough to win the Patriot League, but it is heavily concentrated in Nasir Whitlock (21.0 PPG), Hank Alvey (15.0 PPG on 62.4% FG), and Joshua Ingram (10.6 PPG). Florida has enough length and frontcourt depth to load up on those three without sacrificing rim protection.
- Lehigh's step-up games were revealing: 57 points at Houston, 47 at West Virginia, and 72 at Rutgers. That scoring band is a better guide for this matchup than its Patriot League scoring average.
- Availability and turnaround both lean Florida. Neither team has a major injury concern, Florida has its full frontcourt back, and Lehigh would be playing its second elimination game in three days.
Risk factors
- Lehigh's perimeter shotmaking is the clearest path to a tighter game. Whitlock shoots 44.5% from three, Alvey 41.7%, and the Mountain Hawks are near 36% as a team.
- Florida is only around 30.8% from three in the team profile, so a cold jump-shooting night could hold the Gators in the 80s instead of the 90s.
- If Florida picks up early foul trouble in the frontcourt, Lehigh's veteran guards and Alvey's efficiency inside could keep the margin closer to the 20s.
Historical context
- No. 1 seeds are 158-2 all-time against No. 16 seeds. The only upsets were UMBC over Virginia in 2018 and Fairleigh Dickinson over Purdue in 2023.
- The First Four path is even harsher for automatic qualifiers: NCAA history notes only one auto-bid team has gone from Dayton to a Round of 64 win since the format began in 2011, and that was 2023 Fairleigh Dickinson.
- Lehigh does have real upset history as a program because of its 2012 win over Duke, but that came as a No. 15 seed without the extra First Four turnaround.
Explanation
- A simple midpoint model starts in the low 150s: Florida's 86.8 points per game blended with Lehigh's 74.4 points allowed, then Lehigh's 73.2 points per game blended with Florida's 71.7 points allowed.
- Florida's offense is the main driver. The Gators pair a top-10 efficiency profile with elite offensive rebounding and averaged 93.2 points per game during their 10-game run into the SEC tournament.
- Lehigh can still contribute enough offense to keep this from collapsing. Whitlock, Alvey, and Ingram give the Mountain Hawks legitimate scoring punch, and their team three-point rate is good enough to generate a few quick bursts.
- The counterweight is opponent quality. Lehigh averaged just 58.7 points in its three step-up losses to Houston, West Virginia, and Rutgers, which keeps this projection closer to 150 than the mid-150s.
- Florida's edge on the glass should create efficient second-chance points without needing an all-out track meet.
Risk factors
- If Lehigh's guards hit early threes and Florida answers by playing faster, the total can climb into the mid-150s.
- If Florida's defense controls the paint and runs Lehigh off the line, the Mountain Hawks may finish in the low 50s and drag the game below this projection.
- A massive second-half lead can suppress the total if both benches trade slow possessions for the last several minutes.
Historical context
- Recent 1-vs-16 games usually turn on the underdog's scoring floor more than the favorite's. The top seed often gets near its normal range, while the 16-seed side drives most of the total variance.
- First Four auto-bid winners rarely sustain peak offensive efficiency again two days later, especially when the next opponent has a top-10 defense profile.
- Lehigh's season included seven overtime games, which adds noise to its raw scoring average and is one reason this total projection leans more on opponent-adjusted context than on season averages alone.
Team Comparison
Compare seeds, NET rankings, KenPom profiles, records, and team production side by side.
Record Statistics
| Statistic | Florida | Lehigh |
|---|---|---|
| Record | 26-7 | 18-16 |
| Conference | SEC | Patriot |
| Road | 6-5 | 5-8 |
| Neutral | 4-0 | 1-2 |
| Home | 16-2 | 12-6 |
| Quad 1 | 12-6 | 0-2 |
| Quad 2 | 6-1 | 0-1 |
Team Statistics
| Statistic | Florida | Lehigh |
|---|---|---|
| Team PPG | 86.8 | 73.2 |
| Team RPG | 45.4 | 31.9 |
| Team APG | 16.6 | 14.3 |
| Team SPG | 6.7 | 6.7 |
| Team BPG | 5.1 | 3.3 |
| FG% | 47.8% | 46.4% |
| 3P% | 30.8% | 35.9% |
| FT% | 71.0% | 73.1% |
Rankings
| Statistic | Florida | Lehigh |
|---|---|---|
| Seed | #1 | #16 |
| NET Rank | #4 | #275 |
| KenPom Rank | #4 | #284 |
| KenPom Adj Off Rank | #9 | #290 |
| KenPom Adj Def Rank | #6 | #257 |
Notable matchups
Use quadrant results and marquee games to compare how each team performed against NCAA Tournament caliber competition.

Florida
Quad 1
- L87-9311/03/2025
- W82-6811/16/2025
- L80-8411/27/2025
- L66-6712/02/2025
- L73-7712/09/2025
- L74-7601/03/2026
- W91-6701/10/2026
- W
Oklahoma96-7901/13/2026 - W98-9401/17/2026
- W100-7702/01/2026
- W86-6702/07/2026
- W86-6602/11/2026
- W92-8302/14/2026
- W84-7102/25/2026
- W111-7702/28/2026
- W84-7703/07/2026
- W71-6303/13/2026
- L74-9103/14/2026
Quad 2
- W
Florida St.78-7611/11/2025 - WProvidence90-7811/28/2025
- WGeorge Washington80-7012/13/2025
- W92-7701/06/2026
- L
Auburn67-7601/24/2026 - W
South Carolina95-4801/28/2026 - W
Ole Miss94-7502/21/2026

Lehigh
Quad 1
- L57-7511/03/2025
- L
West Virginia47-6911/09/2025
Quad 2
- L
Rutgers72-8411/14/2025
Player Leaders
Review the scorers, rebounders, playmakers, and efficiency leaders most likely to shape this matchup.

Florida
- 1Thomas HaughF • GP 32 • MIN 33.5FG 46.1% • 3P 33.1% • FT 76.6%17.1PPG
- 2Alex CondonF • GP 32 • MIN 30.6FG 54.8% • 3P 17.0% • FT 64.8%15.0PPG
- 3Boogie FlandG • GP 33 • MIN 30.0FG 43.5% • 3P 23.3% • FT 72.5%11.6PPG
- 4Xaivian LeeG • GP 33 • MIN 27.5FG 41.4% • 3P 28.2% • FT 77.1%11.5PPG
- 5Rueben ChinyeluC • GP 33 • MIN 24.8FG 58.3% • 3P 0.0% • FT 69.0%11.2PPG
- 1Rueben ChinyeluC • GP 33 • MIN 24.8FG 58.3% • 3P 0.0% • FT 69.0%11.5RPG
- 2Alex CondonF • GP 32 • MIN 30.6FG 54.8% • 3P 17.0% • FT 64.8%7.7RPG
- 3Thomas HaughF • GP 32 • MIN 33.5FG 46.1% • 3P 33.1% • FT 76.6%6.2RPG
- 4Micah HandlogtenC • GP 32 • MIN 14.8FG 63.8% • 3P 0.0% • FT 37.0%5.9RPG
- 5Xaivian LeeG • GP 33 • MIN 27.5FG 41.4% • 3P 28.2% • FT 77.1%3.8RPG
- 1Xaivian LeeG • GP 33 • MIN 27.5FG 41.4% • 3P 28.2% • FT 77.1%4.2APG
- 2Alex CondonF • GP 32 • MIN 30.6FG 54.8% • 3P 17.0% • FT 64.8%3.5APG
- 3Boogie FlandG • GP 33 • MIN 30.0FG 43.5% • 3P 23.3% • FT 72.5%3.4APG
- 4Thomas HaughF • GP 32 • MIN 33.5FG 46.1% • 3P 33.1% • FT 76.6%2.0APG
- 5Urban KlavzarG • GP 33 • MIN 20.9FG 43.8% • 3P 40.2% • FT 91.4%1.2APG
- 1Boogie FlandG • GP 33 • MIN 30.0FG 43.5% • 3P 23.3% • FT 72.5%1.8SPG
- 2Xaivian LeeG • GP 33 • MIN 27.5FG 41.4% • 3P 28.2% • FT 77.1%1.2SPG
- 3Thomas HaughF • GP 32 • MIN 33.5FG 46.1% • 3P 33.1% • FT 76.6%1.1SPG
- 4Rueben ChinyeluC • GP 33 • MIN 24.8FG 58.3% • 3P 0.0% • FT 69.0%0.8SPG
- 5Alex CondonF • GP 32 • MIN 30.6FG 54.8% • 3P 17.0% • FT 64.8%0.7SPG
- 1Alex CondonF • GP 32 • MIN 30.6FG 54.8% • 3P 17.0% • FT 64.8%1.4BPG
- 2Rueben ChinyeluC • GP 33 • MIN 24.8FG 58.3% • 3P 0.0% • FT 69.0%1.1BPG
- 3Thomas HaughF • GP 32 • MIN 33.5FG 46.1% • 3P 33.1% • FT 76.6%1.0BPG
- 4Micah HandlogtenC • GP 32 • MIN 14.8FG 63.8% • 3P 0.0% • FT 37.0%0.9BPG
- 5Isaiah BrownG • GP 31 • MIN 12.6FG 45.9% • 3P 33.3% • FT 74.4%0.3BPG

Lehigh
- 1Nasir WhitlockG • GP 34 • MIN 34.9FG 47.6% • 3P 44.5% • FT 79.2%21.0PPG
- 2Hank AlveyF • GP 34 • MIN 30.7FG 62.4% • 3P 41.7% • FT 66.0%15.0PPG
- 3Joshua IngramG • GP 34 • MIN 34.7FG 49.6% • 3P 38.8% • FT 72.5%10.6PPG
- 4Edouard BenoitF • GP 23 • MIN 28.4FG 40.1% • 3P 30.8% • FT 82.5%10.3PPG
- 5Andrew UrosevicG • GP 28 • MIN 18.9FG 39.9% • 3P 33.3% • FT 77.8%7.3PPG
- 1Hank AlveyF • GP 34 • MIN 30.7FG 62.4% • 3P 41.7% • FT 66.0%6.9RPG
- 2Edouard BenoitF • GP 23 • MIN 28.4FG 40.1% • 3P 30.8% • FT 82.5%6.0RPG
- 3Joshua IngramG • GP 34 • MIN 34.7FG 49.6% • 3P 38.8% • FT 72.5%5.1RPG
- 4Nasir WhitlockG • GP 34 • MIN 34.9FG 47.6% • 3P 44.5% • FT 79.2%3.5RPG
- 5Jalen VazquezG • GP 30 • MIN 21.8FG 38.3% • 3P 28.9% • FT 68.6%2.5RPG
- 1Nasir WhitlockG • GP 34 • MIN 34.9FG 47.6% • 3P 44.5% • FT 79.2%3.4APG
- 2Joshua IngramG • GP 34 • MIN 34.7FG 49.6% • 3P 38.8% • FT 72.5%3.3APG
- 3Hank AlveyF • GP 34 • MIN 30.7FG 62.4% • 3P 41.7% • FT 66.0%2.1APG
- 4Jalen VazquezG • GP 30 • MIN 21.8FG 38.3% • 3P 28.9% • FT 68.6%2.0APG
- 5Caleb ThomasG • GP 22 • MIN 21.7FG 34.2% • 3P 18.8% • FT 58.3%2.0APG
- 1Joshua IngramG • GP 34 • MIN 34.7FG 49.6% • 3P 38.8% • FT 72.5%1.4SPG
- 2Hank AlveyF • GP 34 • MIN 30.7FG 62.4% • 3P 41.7% • FT 66.0%1.1SPG
- 3Jalen VazquezG • GP 30 • MIN 21.8FG 38.3% • 3P 28.9% • FT 68.6%1.0SPG
- 4Nasir WhitlockG • GP 34 • MIN 34.9FG 47.6% • 3P 44.5% • FT 79.2%1.0SPG
- 5Caleb ThomasG • GP 22 • MIN 21.7FG 34.2% • 3P 18.8% • FT 58.3%1.0SPG
- 1Hank AlveyF • GP 34 • MIN 30.7FG 62.4% • 3P 41.7% • FT 66.0%1.8BPG
- 2Joshua IngramG • GP 34 • MIN 34.7FG 49.6% • 3P 38.8% • FT 72.5%0.7BPG
- 3Peter KramerG • GP 34 • MIN 20.4FG 38.7% • 3P 37.5% • FT 68.4%0.3BPG
- 4Jake PikeF • GP 17 • MIN 9.6FG 44.4% • 3P 25.0% • FT 80.0%0.3BPG
- 5Edouard BenoitF • GP 23 • MIN 28.4FG 40.1% • 3P 30.8% • FT 82.5%0.2BPG
Injury Report
Check player availability and injury-related production impact before evaluating the final matchup edge.

Florida
No injuries listed for this team.

Lehigh
No injuries listed for this team.