OK Culhane, let me educate you on how you do a barcket

[Herd]

You'd have 6 groups of 4 and one team from each group would be in each quadrant. The top 8 would still be seeded and placed accordingly like they are today. After that you'd break the final 16 into 4 groups of 4 - call them regional 3 seeds through 6 seeds. You could pair the 3 seeds with the 6 seeds regionally and feed them into overall seeds #5-#8 regionally. You could pair the 4 seeds with the 5 seeds regionally and feed them into overall seeds #1-#4 regionally. That's pretty much how they do it in the NCAA baseball tournament where they seed the top 16 and then pool the unseeded 48 into groups of 16 and take one from each group for each of the 16 regionals. It's just instead of 16 regionals with 4 teams each you'd have 8 regionals with 3 teams each.

Groups of 4 when you have a 24 team bracket. What are you going to do when you have 6 teams left? Send 2 of them to the Celebration Bowl? Groups of 4, Brilliant!

[Hammerhead]

In this year's opening round, you have SFA and Incarnate Word with a difference in Sagarin rating of only 0.53. On the other half of the bracket, Kennesaw is rated 22.74 over Davidson.

The average Sagarin rating of the teams paired in the first round ranges from 44.82 (Sacred Heart/Holy Cross) to 64.93 (UNI/Eastern Washington)

PC's idea would have 4 groups of 6 with each group having 2 teams with byes. Just like the current group of 6 we're in that you outlined. It would just be a different (most likely) group of 6, and it would prevent two weaker teams like Sacred Heart & Holy Cross playing this weekend, and potentially stronger teams playing each other like say SDSU & EWU (it didn't happen but very easily could have, and has happened in years past).

Edit: I see PC already elaborated

[56BISON73]

If you seed everyone there is then no planned regionalization. If you are going to have a tournament run the fucking thing the way you are supposed to.

[Hammerhead]

If you seed everyone there is then no planned regionalization. If you are going to have a tournament run the fucking thing the way you are supposed to.

How are you going to accurately seed all 24 teams when there is controversy with the top 8 seeds almost every year?

[Professor Chaos]

Groups of 4 when you have a 24 team bracket. What are you going to do when you have 6 teams left? Send 2 of them to the Celebration Bowl? Groups of 4, Brilliant!

4 teams times 6 groups is 24. Is it really that hard to understand??? I'll lay it out using this year's field.

1 seeds
#1 SHSU
#2 NDSU
#3 JMU
#4 Sac St

2 seeds
#5 Villanova
#6 Montana
#7 ETSU
#8 Montana St

3 seeds
EWU
KSU
Missouri St
SDSU

4 seeds
South Dakota
SLU
UCD
UIW

5 seeds
Holy Cross
SFA
SIU
UTM

6 seeds
Davidson
FAMU
SHU
UNI


From there you regionally pair together the 3 seeds with the 6 seeds and the 4 seeds with the 5 seeds. You can then regionally pair the 3/6 matchups with the #5-#8 overall seeds and regionally pair the 4/5 matchups with the #1-#4 overall seeds. So the bracket this year could look something like this.

(5)SFA @ (4)UIW to #1 SHSU
(6)FAMU @ (3)Missouri St to #8 Montana St
(6)SHU @ (3)SDSU to #5 Villanova
(5)Holy Cross @ (4)UCD to #4 Sac St
(5)UTM @ (4)SLU to #3 JMU
(6)UNI @ (3)EWU to #6 Montana
(6)Davidson @ (3)KSU to #7 ETSU
(5)SIU @ (4)South Dakota to #2 NDSU


The bracket could actually look pretty similar to what they came up with but at least you can make it a little more balanced without having to massively "de-regionalize" it. Most years this would add maybe 2-3 more flights I'd guess.

[EC8CH]

If you seed everyone there is then no planned regionalization. If you are going to have a tournament run the fucking thing the way you are supposed to.

Holy shit I agree with PL.

[ZHerd]

How are you going to accurately seed all 24 teams when there is controversy with the top 8 seeds almost every year?

Just triple the amount of controversy

[123Gobison]

Sorry, NDSU #2, would not play the winner of 22 vs 23 ranked teams. You do a bracket like this when is you rank 1-24.

9 vs 24; Plays 8 Seed; Projected 8 vs 9
10 vs 23; Plays 7 Seed; Projected 7 vs 10
11 vs. 22; Plays 6 Seed; Projected 6 vs 11
12 vs 21; Plays 5 Seed; Projected 5 vs 12
13 vs 20; Plays 4 Seed; Projected 4 vs 13
14 vs 19; Plays 3 Seed; Projected 3 vs 14
15 vs 18; Plays 2 Seed; Projected 2 vs 15
16 vs 17; Plays 1 Seed; Projected 1 vs 16

What in the H is Culhane talking about? If all 24 were ranked, NDSU would play the winner of 15 vs. 18. The assumption is 17-24 get beat in the 1st round. If you're going to go on a rant, have a clue what you are talking about.

He wings it sometimes. He started in 2017-2018 ? after Scottie passed away but when talking on the radio about Bison football he talks as if he was here since 2011.

[HerdBot]

What's a barcket? Is it some kind of drink?

[bisonaudit]

4 teams times 6 groups is 24. Is it really that hard to understand??? I'll lay it out using this year's field.

1 seeds
#1 SHSU
#2 NDSU
#3 JMU
#4 Sac St

2 seeds
#5 Villanova
#6 Montana
#7 ETSU
#8 Montana St

3 seeds
EWU
KSU
Missouri St
SDSU

4 seeds
South Dakota
SLU
UCD
UIW

5 seeds
Holy Cross
SFA
SIU
UTM

6 seeds
Davidson
FAMU
SHU
UNI


From there you regionally pair together the 3 seeds with the 6 seeds and the 4 seeds with the 5 seeds. You can then regionally pair the 3/6 matchups with the #5-#8 overall seeds and regionally pair the 4/5 matchups with the #1-#4 overall seeds. So the bracket this year could look something like this.

(5)SFA @ (4)UIW to #1 SHSU
(6)FAMU @ (3)Missouri St to #8 Montana St
(6)SHU @ (3)SDSU to #5 Villanova
(5)Holy Cross @ (4)UCD to #4 Sac St
(5)UTM @ (4)SLU to #3 JMU
(6)UNI @ (3)EWU to #6 Montana
(6)Davidson @ (3)KSU to #7 ETSU
(5)SIU @ (4)South Dakota to #2 NDSU


The bracket could actually look pretty similar to what they came up with but at least you can make it a little more balanced without having to massively "de-regionalize" it. Most years this would add maybe 2-3 more flights I'd guess.

I like it. There’s still plenty here to complain about.