2026 NCAA Tournament

[Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan)]

Emory, Chicago and Wash u can all get to final four. Last year they put Trinity and tufts in same bracket and put Wesleyan in another. Which was fair. Putting 3 teams that are top 9 teams in the country from the same conference all in the same bracket just not doing the right thing for tournament. It's shortsighted and being cheap.

It is actually worse and a real slight to the NESCAC League and should be an embarrassment to the committee. I posted above that UAA could get 3 teams to the final 4, they can actually can their top 4 teams all into the final 4, WT..... and NESCAC can only get 1. UAA Numbers 2, 5, 14, 24, yet the NESCA top 3 teams 1, 8, 9 in 1 bracket. There is ZERO justification for that!!!!

The seeding is the justification.  This is how brackets work.  8 plays 9 if the seeds hold.

Ryan you are being selective in looking at the seedings, it is not that way thru out the brackets. Someone in that room should have had some common sense. If the common sense was that well at least 2 of them can get to FT Wayne for the elite 8, that is not common sense.

I'm looking at the top 16 seeds, the pod hosts.  They are in perfect alignment all the way through.  Yes, some of the teams on the 2 lines are out of whack - I don't know what - but the overall seeds are lined up perfectly - and the committee is spending an extra flight to do it.

[ziggy]

Does it work the exact same for the 4 UAA teams? The top-rated conference in the country by NPI and 3 teams in the top 10 in the country all in the same bracket, makes ZERO sense. You just don't do that. 2 yes, just like last year, 3 that is not right to those teams or the conference. Wouldn't even be a consideration in D1 to have all 3 together. It just the cheap and easy way out, but not the right thing for d3 basketball.

Yes, Emory, Chicago and WashU pods are exactly where you would expect their overall NPI rank to be in a 1-64 bracket. Just as the Trinity (CT), Wesleyan and Tufts pods are.

Diverging from true seeding because teams from the same conference could meet in the Sweet 16 would be crazy.

I was just told by someone if Wesleyan had beaten Trinity yesterday, and even with them moving up NPI wise, that all 3 NESCAC's would still have been the exact same. So Trinity/Wesleyan still protected thru elite 8, but all 3 in the same bracket.

If Wesleyan had beaten Trinity (CT) yesterday, Wesleyan would have finished NPI #6 and Trinity NPI #3. So while they still would have been bracketed together at opposite sides of a quadrant, it likely would have been without Tufts. Jumbos are still the #9 overall seed but still line up well geographically for natural seeding with #8, who would have been Endicott in that scenario.

[Ralph Turner]

First complaint, how do they put Trinity and Tufts and Wesleyan all in the same bracket. The announcer just said, it's good that Tufts and Wesleyan can't meet until elite 8, that is wrong they will meet in sweet 16 and then a potential Trinity vs Tufts/Weslyan in elite 8, makes no sense at all.

Trinity (CT), Wesleyan and Tufts are actually bracketed perfectly true to overall seeding. I understand NESCAC fans won't really like it but I take this happening as a great development.

(Much conversation has transpired since I saw D3BALL's post. Ahhh work! But it does play the bills.)

Actually, I believe that the NESCAC schools have gamed the system quite effectively.

1) They only play single round robin. The NESCAC only played 10 conference games. Almost all other conferences play double round robin, intra-division with crossover or intra-conference. The NESCAC only played 10 conference games. The CCIW, the NCAC, the OAC and the ODAC play 16 conference games. (Last season 2024-25, the MIAC cut back to 16 conference games from 20.) That 10-game conference schedule permitted insightful coaches to play a non-conference schedule that would boost the NPI with a beatable good team from another conference rather than taking a loss from a "better" NESCAC team. The UAA long ago figured out that it did not want to inflict a damaging loss to a ("Pool C") bubble team in the post-season tourney. The UAA also has the advantage of geographical diversity that broadens the number of available opponents who can contribute to a good NPI.

It is not uncommon for some teams to play 3 teams before that NCAA's.

2) If #9 is scheduled to play #8 in the round of 16, great! The system is working. The conference is guaranteed an avenue to the Elite 8.

[D3BBALL]

Does it work the exact same for the 4 UAA teams? The top-rated conference in the country by NPI and 3 teams in the top 10 in the country all in the same bracket, makes ZERO sense. You just don't do that. 2 yes, just like last year, 3 that is not right to those teams or the conference. Wouldn't even be a consideration in D1 to have all 3 together. It just the cheap and easy way out, but not the right thing for d3 basketball.

Yes, Emory, Chicago and WashU pods are exactly where you would expect their overall NPI rank to be in a 1-64 bracket. Just as the Trinity (CT), Wesleyan and Tufts pods are.

Diverging from true seeding because teams from the same conference could meet in the Sweet 16 would be crazy.

I was just told by someone if Wesleyan had beaten Trinity yesterday, and even with them moving up NPI wise, that all 3 NESCAC's would still have been the exact same. So Trinity/Wesleyan still protected thru elite 8, but all 3 in the same bracket.

If Wesleyan had beaten Trinity (CT) yesterday, Wesleyan would have finished NPI #6 and Trinity NPI #3. So while they still would have been bracketed together at opposite sides of a quadrant, it likely would have been without Tufts. Jumbos are still the #9 overall seed but still line up well geographically for natural seeding with #8, who would have been Endicott in that scenario.

I am just telling what I was told. I don't know anyone that can look at this with an open mind and think this right and best for the NCAA D3 tournament. No one I have talked to thinks it is. Why is Babson who is technically a 5 seed lined up to play the #1 seed in the country, in the second round, while Mary Washington the 4th seed set to play WPI a 7/8 seed in the second round? Distance is pretty much the same for both Babson and WPI and within the 500 miles. Seems like the committee clearly didn't value the NESCAC league or has a bias. Trinity's bracket has 8 of the top 25 NPI teams, no other bracket has more than 6. Last year many people thought by far Trinity had the toughest bracket and looks the same this year as well. How did they miss this? And in reality, it doesn't matter, because they are all close enough 21 compared to 30, but it just shows the committee doesn't look at everything the correct way. This would never happen in D1, 3 top 10 teams in the country from the same conference all meeting before the final 4, just wouldn't be done.
Also, not that it matters, but if Trinity lost in the finals, I thought they only moved down 1 spot, they couldn't go any lower, at least by your NPI numbers after Saturday's games.

[D3BBALL]

First complaint, how do they put Trinity and Tufts and Wesleyan all in the same bracket. The announcer just said, it's good that Tufts and Wesleyan can't meet until elite 8, that is wrong they will meet in sweet 16 and then a potential Trinity vs Tufts/Weslyan in elite 8, makes no sense at all.

Trinity (CT), Wesleyan and Tufts are actually bracketed perfectly true to overall seeding. I understand NESCAC fans won't really like it but I take this happening as a great development.

(Much conversation has transpired since I saw D3BALL's post. Ahhh work! But it does play the bills.)

Actually, I believe that the NESCAC schools have gamed the system quite effectively.

1) They only play single round robin. The NESCAC only played 10 conference games. Almost all other conferences play double round robin, inter-division with crossover or inter-conference. The NESCAC only played 10 conference games. The CCIW, the NCAC, the OAC and the ODAC play 16 conference games. (Last season 2024-25, the MIAC cut back to 16 conference games from 20.) That 10-game conference schedule permitted insightful coaches to play a non-conference schedule that would boost the NPI with a beatable good team from another conference rather than taking a loss from a "better" NESCAC team. The UAA long ago figured out that it did not want to inflict a damaging loss to a ("Pool C") bubble team in the post-season tourney. The UAA also has the advantage of geographical diversity that broadens the number of available opponents who can contribute to a good NPI.

It is not uncommon for some teams to play 3 teams before that NCAA's.

2) If #9 is scheduled to play #8 in the round of 16, great! The system is working. The conference is guaranteed an avenue to the Elite 8.

Interesting point, maybe Ziggy in his spare time (lol) could do an analysis of how playing each other twice would change their NPI. UAA because of NCAA rules, I believe, plays 2 less games, they can only play 25, so does that help or hurt them, I guess depends on who they play and whether or not they win. But 2 years in a row Trinity has by far the toughest bracket based on NPI ratings, hummmmmm!!!! And then they put in next 2 best NESCAC teams and top 10 teams hmmm..., makes no sense. There were questions last year about the NESCAC and how good it really was. Well Wesleyan went to the final four, played a good non-conference schedule and played well against Trinity, who beat an UAA team filled with Grad players.

[Greek Tragedy]

Probably doesn't make you feel any better, but the WIAC has 3 of their 4 teams in the same bracket. 

[D3BBALL]

Probably doesn't make you feel any better, but the WIAC has 3 of their 4 teams in the same bracket. 

Yes, just talked about that in the NESCAC thread. But they are 13, 20 and 31 in NPI rankings in the same bracket, which is different. If they put Bates, Amherst, Tufts and Trinity in the same bracket, I would be more ok (still wrong) with it then what they did, obviously as long as Tufts and trinity couldn't meet before the Elite 8.

[FCGrizzliesGrad]

Pods by total seed from "toughest" to "easiest" (pods should total 130)

122- 2 Emory
124- 5 Chicago
125- 6 Randolph-Macon
126- 4 Mary Washington
128- 11 Christopher Newport
128- 14 Washington U
130- 7 Endicott
130- 8 Wesleyan
131- 9 Tufts
131- 12 Gustavus Adolphus
131- 16 Redlands
132- 1 Trinity (CT)
132- 3 St Thomas (TX)
135- 10 Illinois Wesleyan
136- 13 UW-La Crosse
139- 15 Montclair St

1st round matchups furthest from the standard (seeds should total 65)
56- 20 UW-Stevens Point vs 36 Mary Hardin-Baylor
58- 53 Penn St-Behrend @ 5 Chicago
59- 22 Roanoke vs 37 Rhodes

71- 32 John Carroll vs 39 Grinnell
73- 28 Bates vs 45 Yeshiva
74- 27 C-M-S vs 47 Aurora
75- 63 Bethany Lutheran @ 12 Gusavus Adolphus

[Jake Feldman]

I personally think the NCAA should expand the D3 tournament to 72 teams, since there will be over 425 Division III institutions that at least field one varsity team (mostly both, but 22 single-gender schools like Smith or Wabash) to give more schools a chance to qualify. I would also like to see host institutions be allowed to host both tournaments in the same weekend. (Using a Thursday-Friday-Saturday format, with respect to Yeshiva if they make it). Would any of you get on board with an expanded field and allowing schools to host both men's and women's games in a weekend?

[FCGrizzliesGrad]

I personally think the NCAA should expand the D3 tournament to 72 teams, since there will be over 425 Division III institutions that at least field one varsity team (mostly both, but 22 single-gender schools like Smith or Wabash) to give more schools a chance to qualify. I would also like to see host institutions be allowed to host both tournaments in the same weekend. (Using a Thursday-Friday-Saturday format, with respect to Yeshiva if they make it). Would any of you get on board with an expanded field and allowing schools to host both men's and women's games in a weekend?

Football expanded from 32 to 40 not long ago but that was needed because there were only 4 or 5 at large spots. There's no way they'd expand basketball to just 72. It'd have to be a significant jump to 80 or 96 and that's not happening unless we get get a mass exodus from D1 to D3.

It would be nice to see schools be able to host both the same weekend, but I'm sure there are some schools that just don't have the ability to (locker rooms, hotels, etc).

[Jake Feldman]

I personally think the NCAA should expand the D3 tournament to 72 teams, since there will be over 425 Division III institutions that at least field one varsity team (mostly both, but 22 single-gender schools like Smith or Wabash) to give more schools a chance to qualify. I would also like to see host institutions be allowed to host both tournaments in the same weekend. (Using a Thursday-Friday-Saturday format, with respect to Yeshiva if they make it). Would any of you get on board with an expanded field and allowing schools to host both men's and women's games in a weekend?

Football expanded from 32 to 40 not long ago but that was needed because there were only 4 or 5 at large spots. There's no way they'd expand basketball to just 72. It'd have to be a significant jump to 80 or 96 and that's not happening unless we get get a mass exodus from D1 to D3.

It would be nice to see schools be able to host both the same weekend, but I'm sure there are some schools that just don't have the ability to (locker rooms, hotels, etc).

Regarding your quote, I see the 72-team field as the perfect size until the inevitable non-revenue share school exodus occurs, and even then, they may either offer scholarships in D2, or be in the non-scholarship divisions (D3 or D4 depending on athletic budgets, travel and history)

[FCGrizzliesGrad]

I personally think the NCAA should expand the D3 tournament to 72 teams, since there will be over 425 Division III institutions that at least field one varsity team (mostly both, but 22 single-gender schools like Smith or Wabash) to give more schools a chance to qualify. I would also like to see host institutions be allowed to host both tournaments in the same weekend. (Using a Thursday-Friday-Saturday format, with respect to Yeshiva if they make it). Would any of you get on board with an expanded field and allowing schools to host both men's and women's games in a weekend?

Football expanded from 32 to 40 not long ago but that was needed because there were only 4 or 5 at large spots. There's no way they'd expand basketball to just 72. It'd have to be a significant jump to 80 or 96 and that's not happening unless we get get a mass exodus from D1 to D3.

It would be nice to see schools be able to host both the same weekend, but I'm sure there are some schools that just don't have the ability to (locker rooms, hotels, etc).

Regarding your quote, I see the 72-team field as the perfect size until the inevitable non-revenue share school exodus occurs, and even then, they may either offer scholarships in D2, or be in the non-scholarship divisions (D3 or D4 depending on athletic budgets, travel and history)

The problem is, you're adding an extra round which is great in theory but a lot of trouble in reality. When will it be played? How many extra flights will it cost trying to match these teams up? You'll have just 16 teams playing the opener while 56 don't.

Comparing to football, the expansion would be 25% which would make it 80 teams for basketball. Football went from 12.5% at large bids (4/32) in 2023 to 32.5% (13/40) in 2024. Basketball is already at 32.8% (21/64). Football has roughly 245 teams and 40 tournament bids. That's a ratio of 6.13 teams per bid. Basketball had 404 eligible teams this year I believe. That's a ratio of 6.31 teams per bid. Even a small enlargement to 72 bids would drop that down to 5.61 teams per bid.

[deiscanton]

First complaint, how do they put Trinity and Tufts and Wesleyan all in the same bracket. The announcer just said, it's good that Tufts and Wesleyan can't meet until elite 8, that is wrong they will meet in sweet 16 and then a potential Trinity vs Tufts/Weslyan in elite 8, makes no sense at all.

Trinity (CT), Wesleyan and Tufts are actually bracketed perfectly true to overall seeding. I understand NESCAC fans won't really like it but I take this happening as a great development.

They are seeded perfectly but you don't put them all in the same bracket as only 1 of them has a chance to get to final 4, that is not right for a conference that is ranked 1st or 2nd in the country. If they put bates and or Amherst in then I get it.

But this year, the Elite 8 round is in Fort Wayne due to the fact that the national championship game is delayed a few weeks until Indianapolis so that it can be held on Division I's Final Four Weekend.   In effect, this year, making it to the Elite 8 round will get the same treatment as making it to the D3 "Final Four" in the sense that all 8 teams that do make it to Fort Wayne will get the same Fort Wayne experience as if they made it to the D3 Final Four. 

Last year, Wesleyan, Trinity (CT) and Tufts were in the top 8, so they got protected until the Elite 8 round, but only 2 of those NESCAC teams could still make it to Fort Wayne, because the Elite 8 round was not played in Fort Wayne. 

[D3BBALL]

I personally think the NCAA should expand the D3 tournament to 72 teams, since there will be over 425 Division III institutions that at least field one varsity team (mostly both, but 22 single-gender schools like Smith or Wabash) to give more schools a chance to qualify. I would also like to see host institutions be allowed to host both tournaments in the same weekend. (Using a Thursday-Friday-Saturday format, with respect to Yeshiva if they make it). Would any of you get on board with an expanded field and allowing schools to host both men's and women's games in a weekend?

Football expanded from 32 to 40 not long ago but that was needed because there were only 4 or 5 at large spots. There's no way they'd expand basketball to just 72. It'd have to be a significant jump to 80 or 96 and that's not happening unless we get get a mass exodus from D1 to D3.

It would be nice to see schools be able to host both the same weekend, but I'm sure there are some schools that just don't have the ability to (locker rooms, hotels, etc).

Regarding your quote, I see the 72-team field as the perfect size until the inevitable non-revenue share school exodus occurs, and even then, they may either offer scholarships in D2, or be in the non-scholarship divisions (D3 or D4 depending on athletic budgets, travel and history)

The problem is, you're adding an extra round which is great in theory but a lot of trouble in reality. When will it be played? How many extra flights will it cost trying to match these teams up? You'll have just 16 teams playing the opener while 56 don't.

Comparing to football, the expansion would be 25% which would make it 80 teams for basketball. Football went from 12.5% at large bids (4/32) in 2023 to 32.5% (13/40) in 2024. Basketball is already at 32.8% (21/64). Football has roughly 245 teams and 40 tournament bids. That's a ratio of 6.13 teams per bid. Basketball had 404 eligible teams this year I believe. That's a ratio of 6.31 teams per bid. Even a small enlargement to 72 bids would drop that down to 5.61 teams per bid.

Whether it makes sense or not, never going to happen.  NCAA is not going to pay more for D3 sports.

[D3BBALL]

First complaint, how do they put Trinity and Tufts and Wesleyan all in the same bracket. The announcer just said, it's good that Tufts and Wesleyan can't meet until elite 8, that is wrong they will meet in sweet 16 and then a potential Trinity vs Tufts/Weslyan in elite 8, makes no sense at all.

Trinity (CT), Wesleyan and Tufts are actually bracketed perfectly true to overall seeding. I understand NESCAC fans won't really like it but I take this happening as a great development.

They are seeded perfectly but you don't put them all in the same bracket as only 1 of them has a chance to get to final 4, that is not right for a conference that is ranked 1st or 2nd in the country. If they put bates and or Amherst in then I get it.

But this year, the Elite 8 round is in Fort Wayne due to the fact that the national championship game is delayed a few weeks until Indianapolis so that it can be held on Division I's Final Four Weekend.   In effect, this year, making it to the Elite 8 round will get the same treatment as making it to the D3 "Final Four" in the sense that all 8 teams that do make it to Fort Wayne will get the same Fort Wayne experience as if they made it to the D3 Final Four. 

Last year, Wesleyan, Trinity (CT) and Tufts were in the top 8, so they got protected until the Elite 8 round, but only 2 of those NESCAC teams could still make it to Fort Wayne, because the Elite 8 round was not played in Fort Wayne. 

Actually, all 3 were in different brackets last year and they could have all made the final 4.

Not sure if this has been brought up but the D3 championship game is on Easter Sunday. This is going to hurt attendance from the local/Indy area as well as people coming in from out of state, as they are not going to come with it being Easter. Another blunder.