2026 NCAA Tournament

[D3BBALL]

No one that I know thinks this is right or the best for tournament.

I guess no one in this thread counts

Again, you and Ziggy point that the got the seedings right 1-16 going to the elite 8, my point is that you want to do what is best for the tournament.

What does "best for the tournament" mean? I don't think there's a single answer to that.

For Tufts and Wesleyan to play in the sweet 16, it not good for the tournament or Trinity/Wesleyan to play in the elite 8.

Why is it not good? The 8th and 9th seeded teams should be playing in the sweet 16. The 1st and 8th seed should be playing in the elite 8. Why should it matter what conference they come from?
If higher seeds won every game as they should in theory, The NESCAC should have 4 teams in the 2nd round (1, 8, 9, 28). The NESCAC should have 3 make the Sweet 16 (1, 8, 9). The NESCAC should have 2 make the Elite Eight (1, 8). The NESCAC should have just 1 team make the final four (1). That's not being prevented by this bracket.

I didn't say that, I said anyone I know, I don't know you, lol

It means if a conference is loaded and I think a lot of us agree that UAA and NESCAC are by far the best 2 conferences, then you should be able to make sure they don't play conference games, for elite teams, early, that means before elite 8.

Like I said 1-4, 5-8, 9-12, 13-16 are usually fairly comparable, not perfect, but it is how D1 looks at this at times. I am not saying move a 4th seeded team to 5th, but you could move them to 3rd, not saying move 5-8 out of 2 seeds, but you could move them around and so forth. This year 1-4 difference is 3.05 points, 5-8 difference is 2.09 points, 9-12 is 1.50 points, 13-16 is .455. 1's are 1's, 2 are 2's, 3 are 3's so on, why not move them up down, it just makes sense and it is what D1 does, so it is not something new. Could easily move Wesleyan up, or Tufts down, or move Trinity to the second spot. They basically told Trinity you are not really the #1 seed as you are going to maybe play a 5th seed in second round. Would never happen in D1.

When you get down to the sweet sixteen, lets say the UAA teams are so much better than anyone else and they knock each other out, how it that doing it correctly. Again, this is my opinion and the way D1 does it. You can use analytics, and I am not against that, but in the end some common sense needs to come into play.

Your last statement, is 100% correct, but what does that mean. Does it mean just give the title to Trinity, of course not. They are #1 in every ranking used I can see (Massey, D3Datacast efficiency, NPI, the voted top 25). Again, IMO, the Committee needed to use common sense. The 3 top UAA (2, 5, 14) teams all have a chance to get to the final 4, the NESCAC the #1 rated conference in the country can only get 1 of the top 9 (1, 8, 9) into the final 4. That is 100% why D1 doesn't do it this way. We are not talking about teams above 20 in rankings, where it doesn't matter.

[FCGrizzliesGrad]

In this year's bracket the NESCAC can get 3 teams in the Final Four, but that would require upsets to happen. The exact same thing would still be required in your proposal to split up Wesleyan/Tufts/Trinity.

I think the NESCAC just got unlucky to have their teams ranked perfectly to end up in the same quadrant but they're still appropriately placed. The UAA was one spot away from a sweet 16 matchup had WashU or Emory been one spot worse. If Wesleyan or Tufts won a game or two more it wouldn't be an issue.

Ultimately I think the 1-16 seeding was done correctly and you don't. Agree to disagree.

[D3BBALL]

In this year's bracket the NESCAC can get 3 teams in the Final Four, but that would require upsets to happen. The exact same thing would still be required in your proposal to split up Wesleyan/Tufts/Trinity.

I think the NESCAC just got unlucky to have their teams ranked perfectly to end up in the same quadrant but they're still appropriately placed. The UAA was one spot away from a sweet 16 matchup had WashU or Emory been one spot worse. If Wesleyan or Tufts won a game or two more it wouldn't be an issue.

Ultimately I think the 1-16 seeding was done correctly and you don't. Agree to disagree.

Yes, Bates and Amherst and one of Trinity Tufts Wesleyan could get in so they could get three in. But in the same vein, UAA could get all four of their teams in.
You just actually think, and we will agree to disagree on this, that it's fair that the uaa can get three teams that are in the top 15 into the final four and the NESCAC that has three teams in the top 10 can only get one into the final four. Again D1 would not do this and it's a proven fact they wouldn't do this.
I said earlier, it would be fine if they had two of tufts Wesleyan or Trinity in the same bracket, but having three is not the right way to do it. The number one rated conference in the country by NPI and three top 10 teams by NPI can only get one into the final four. Makes absolutely no sense and would never ever be done this way in D1.