Committee top 16 reveal tonight!

[meyers7]

Re: Tennessee

I know this is not about the top 16 teams but can Tennessee really get into the NCAA tournament with only 16 wins?

We had this discussion a couple weeks ago about how Tennessee would always get into the dance because of who they are. I agreed with that at the time..

But with only 16 wins and 2 games left against LSU and Vanderbilt (they could definitely lose both) how can they still possibly get in? They have lost a bunch of games in a roll now.

Of course they can get in by winning their tournament but if they dont?

How does the NCAA justify putting a team in with only 16- 18 wins and not winning their conference tournament?

TN is getting in the tourney, even if they lose out the season. They are most likely going to end up #7 in the SEC. Tied with Kentucky and Georgia at 8-8. But I think they have the tie breakers?? With Alabama at #10 (but they'll probably be 21-10). I think the NCAA will take all 10. That would include TN. (they took 10 last year)

Besides, they're TN, if they can find any reason to include them, they will. (whether they deserve it or not)

 

[Cuango]

I thought we, as the top seed, got the weakest #2? Is that not right?
Imagine my surprise when I see LSU in our bracket and Iowa in South Carolina’s bracket! In what universe is Iowa better than LSU?

 

[Cuango]

If South Carolina wins out and they end up as the 3rd #1 seed; I expect them to not be happy about it. I remember that Dawn complained last year during the selection show and indicated South Carolina shouldn’t bother playing such a tough schedule if they aren’t rewarded for it.

I expect similar if they win the toughest conference tournament and get nothing for it.

Don’t look now, but they have Iowa as their number 2! Hard to imagine a better draw than that!

 

[Centerstream]

I thought we, as the top seed, got the weakest #2? Is that not right?
Imagine my surprise when I see LSU in our bracket and Iowa in South Carolina’s bracket! In what universe is Iowa better than LSU?

I'm not sure how the selection committee works, and don't care to know, but maybe they are taking into account that UConn has played Iowa and SoCar has played LSU (and could play again)?

 

[southie]

I thought we, as the top seed, got the weakest #2? Is that not right?
Imagine my surprise when I see LSU in our bracket and Iowa in South Carolina’s bracket! In what universe is Iowa better than LSU?

That is not "right", and hasn't been the guideline for several years.

LSU cannot be in the same regional with SEC members, South Carolina and Texas/ Vandy as two of them are likely to be #1 seeds. So, LSU as a 2-seed is required to be paired with #1 UConn or #1 UCLA to avoid intra-conference matchups with any #1 seeds from the SEC. It just doesn't matter anymore who the "strongest/weakest" 2-seeds are; it's about re-positioning certain teams based on conference.

Iowa and Michigan from the B1G can't be placed as the 2 or 3 seed as fellow B1G member UCLA.

 

[BBallF]

I'm not sure how the selection committee works, and don't care to know, but maybe they are taking into account that UConn has played Iowa and SoCar has played LSU (and could play again)?

So what? The teams are supposed to be ranked absolutely. #1 overall should play #8 overall. If they ever did that in the men's tourney there would be a huge problem.

 

[BigTenGuy]

I thought we, as the top seed, got the weakest #2? Is that not right?
Imagine my surprise when I see LSU in our bracket and Iowa in South Carolina’s bracket! In what universe is Iowa better than LSU?

When you watch LSU and Iowa play, LSU is the clearly superior team. But the NET, WAB & SOS metrics paint a more complicated picture:

Team	NET	WAB	Q1	Q2	Q3	Q4	AVG NET Ws	AVG NET Ls	NET SOS	NET NON-CON SOS
LSU	5	10	5--4	4--0	3--0	12--0	153	7	36	279
Iowa	9	5	7--5	6--0	2--0	7--0	84	12	3	36

 

[southie]

So what? The teams are supposed to be ranked absolutely. #1 overall should play #8 overall. If they ever did that in the men's tourney there would be a huge problem.

That's how it was done using the traditional S-curve in both men's and women's brackets. Women changed shortly after Big East members UConn and Rutgers faced off for the fourth time (I think) in a season culminating in an Elite 8 matchup as the 1/2 seeds in their region.

 

[Woof]

Who cares about conferences??? If you want to get an easier path, have a better season. There is no way that a team that has earned an easier path should be punished just so either Texas or SC doesn't have to play LSU a fourth time. But it doesn't matter because UCLA will probably end up the overall top seed. WAB is a joke.

 

[BBallF]

That's how it was done using the traditional S-curve in both men's and women's brackets. Women changed shortly after Big East members UConn and Rutgers faced off for the fourth time (I think) in a season culminating in an Elite 8 matchup as the 1/2 seeds in their region.

I rememberer when there really were regions and regionals. Once you create any exceptions to a straight meritocratic selection you create issues, favoritism, and the like.

 

[Centerstream]

So what? The teams are supposed to be ranked absolutely. #1 overall should play #8 overall. If they ever did that in the men's tourney there would be a huge problem.

If every team is ranked absolutely, then why is there a need for the Selection Committee?
Plug every team that qualifies for the tournament into the spreadsheet according to the what the final algorithm comes up with, and there you have the entire bracket. No human interaction. But I am guessing that this doesn't happen. If it did, every bracketology "expert" bracket would be the same as the NCAA bracket. Has this ever been the case?

 

[Cuango]

That is not "right", and hasn't been the guideline for several years.

LSU cannot be in the same regional with SEC members, South Carolina and Texas/ Vandy as two of them are likely to be #1 seeds. So, LSU as a 2-seed is required to be paired with #1 UConn or #1 UCLA to avoid intra-conference matchups with any #1 seeds from the SEC. It just doesn't matter anymore who the "strongest/weakest" 2-seeds are; it's about re-positioning certain teams based on conference.

Iowa and Michigan from the B1G can't be placed as the 2 or 3 seed as fellow B1G member UCLA.

Thanks for pointing that out.

 

[NycUcWbbFan]

2026 WCBB NCAAT Bracketology Teams by Overall Seeding:

• Number in () is the NET on the day on/before the Bracketology date.
• AQ means “Automatic Qualifier” for a Conference.

 

[NycUcWbbFan]

NCAA Dashboard (2/23/2026) appended to ESPN Bracketology (2/24/2026) to provide insight on:

• (a) the Hypothesis Testing continuum of the 37 At-Large (Type &1 = 2) Qualifiers;
• (b) the 68-team Bracketed S-Curve (Overall Seed (OSeed)).

The NCAA procedures for (a), S-Curve and (b) are here.

&1 Type = 1 (Automatic Qualifier) and 2 (At-large Qualifier).

Top 20 Overall Seed | Remaining Schedule

• 1. UConn | Torvik Schedule
• 2. UCLA | Torvik Schedule
• 3. South Carolina | Torvik Schedule
• 4. Texas | Torvik Schedule
• 5. Michigan | Torvik Schedule
• 6. Iowa | Torvik Schedule
• 7. Vanderbilt | Torvik Schedule
• 8. LSU | Torvik Schedule
• 9. Maryland | Torvik Schedule
• 10. Louisville | Torvik Schedule
• 11. Duke | Torvik Schedule
• 12. TCU | Torvik Schedule
• 13. Ohio St. | Torvik Schedule
• 14. Michigan St. | Torvik Schedule
• 15. Oklahoma | Torvik Schedule
• 16. Kentucky | Torvik Schedule
• 17. Minnesota | Torvik Schedule
• 18. West Virginia | Torvik Schedule
• 19. North Carolina | Torvik Schedule
• 20. Ole Miss | Torvik Schedule

By Conference Bids: Conference Standings | Conference Tournaments

 

[hoopsfan22]

If every team is ranked absolutely, then why is there a need for the Selection Committee?
Plug every team that qualifies for the tournament into the spreadsheet according to the what the final algorithm comes up with, and there you have the entire bracket. No human interaction. But I am guessing that this doesn't happen. If it did, every bracketology "expert" bracket would be the same as the NCAA bracket. Has this ever been the case?

They should just have AI do it. It could generate the entire bracket in seconds and we're done.

 

[visitingcock]

They should just have AI do it. It could generate the entire bracket in seconds and we're done.

No eyeball test ?

 

[Centerstream]

They should just have AI do it. It could generate the entire bracket in seconds and we're done.

My point is that you don't need AI. According to posters here on the BY, the Selection Committee uses specific criteria to determine the schools that are selected for the tournament. These are things such as, (but not only these) NET, Quad wins and losses, etc. These are absolute. Just rank the teams accordingly and you have your bracket with zero human intervention.
And I realize that this isn't really what is done and probably never will be done. Thus the need for the Selection Committee.

 

[hoopsfan22]

No eyeball test ?

Do people really have much objection to what the computers are spitting out with respect to formulas like NET? You could always develop a more complete formula if it's insufficient. Maybe a team gets screwed here or there, whatever screwed means in this context, but I'd argue in the long run the computers will create less problems than humans.

 

[Vowelguy]

My point is that you don't need AI. According to posters here on the BY, the Selection Committee uses specific criteria to determine the schools that are selected for the tournament. These are things such as, (but not only these) NET, Quad wins and losses, etc. These are absolute. Just rank the teams accordingly and you have your bracket with zero human intervention.
And I realize that this isn't really what is done and probably never will be done. Thus the need for the Selection Committee.

They are not. For one, while you can rank each category, how do you combine them? And there are non-tangible criteria. Like eye test. Like injuries.

 

[YKCornelius]

Hey experts - I'm trying to find out if there's another reveal before the selection weekend, and all I've come up with is the day before official brackets are out. Is this correct?

BRS24, I don't know if you have received a response already to your question, but the second reveal will be 1100 EST on ESPN this coming Sunday (01 March).

 

[Stagnant]

Don’t look now, but they have Iowa as their number 2! Hard to imagine a better draw than that!

Yeah, the new bracketology was very favorable for South Carolina. An extremely easy path to the final four.

 

[Centerstream]

They are not. For one, while you can rank each category, how do you combine them? And there are non-tangible criteria. Like eye test. Like injuries.

Isn't this something the Selection Committee does? If they do, then an algorithm can be created.
And if you went back to my previous posts in this thread, I was posting my opinion as a result of another post concerning absolute rankings. To quote it "The teams are supposed to be ranked absolutely."

 

[packwrap]

I'm not sure how the selection committee works, and don't care to know, but maybe they are taking into account that UConn has played Iowa and SoCar has played LSU (and could play again)?

Don't panic yet.

None of these brackets being discussed now are prepared by the ncaa selection committee, rather they are best guesses by media pundits.

Plenty of action still going on thru mid March that will impact the final actual bracket.

 

[visitingcock]

Yeah, the new bracketology was very favorable for South Carolina. An extremely easy path to the final four.

bracketology and actual seeding are two different things. There are two regular season games and one to three conference tournament games remaining for almost-all of these teams. Have any of these bracketologies ever been the same three weeks in a row?

 

[1974yankees]

Does what # 1 seed Uconn gets really make a difference? Whether they are the first 1 seed or the 4th 1 seed....

If I remember correctly, Uconn was a 2 seed last year in Spokane.

I believe the end result was Uconn winning the National Championship.

No matter how you slice it and dice it, the 3 or 4 best teams will have to beat each other anyway sooner or later...