Franketology: March 8, 2026
I have given in. I have made the Redhawks an at-large team. I remain strong in my conviction that they are not worthy of an at-large bid, but I have resigned myself to the fact that the committee will not deny them if they lose in the MAC tournament. It’s also a useful exercise in that it creates a bid thief—Akron—who has a better predictive metrics average, and therefore gets the Franketology auto bid.
We also have our first tickets officially punched:
Big South - High Point
MVC - Northern Iowa
OVC - Tennessee State
NEC - LIU
North Dakota and North Dakota St. are squaring off in the Summit League final as I publish this, so if North Dakota wins, this will be outdated by the AM.
The only other point I want to hit on is tournament expansion…oh, that’s all? Yes, that’s all. I’m anti-expansion. The whole world outside of NCAA HQ in Indianapolis is anti-expansion. This year is a perfect example why:
Look at that list. WOOF. None of these teams appear to want to play in the NCAA Tournament. That’s almost literally my entire bubble. Current 10 & 11-seeds: UCF, Missouri, NC St., Texas, Indiana (but not Ohio St. or Santa Clara, 10-seed Iowa lost today, after Matt’s tweet); First Four Out: SMU, Va. Tech, Cal (but not Ok. St.); Next Four Out: Auburn and New Mexico; and deeper bubble teams (for me at least): USC & Seton Hall. This is part of the reason why I’ve relented on Miami (OH), other than my resignation. The gap is just much closer now, and the WAB is too good…
…but back to the point at hand. Expansion. Here are the 16 teams with the highest WABs that are not in my field at the moment:
Auburn (45) - 16-15, just no. They’ll be, at best, 2 games over .500 if they don’t win the conference tournament. Just no.
Va. Tech (46) - 19-12, Efficiency Metrics Average of 58.33; 2-10 Q1
SMU (48) - 19-12, not an awful resume, which is why they’re my first team out. If I had my druthers, I probably slot them over Miami (OH)
Stanford (49) - 20-11, but a whopping 3 Q3 losses, 64.33 efficiency metrics average
Cal (50) - 20-10, just 2-3 in Q2, also has a Q3 loss, 70.67 efficiency metrics average
Oklahoma St. (51) - 18-13, yikes. 0-6 in Q1A, 2-10 in Q1, 76.33 efficiency metrics average
New Mexico (52) - 21-9, 0-2 in Q1A, 2-6 in Q1, 2 Q3 losses
Boise St. (53) - 19-10, Q3 loss, efficiency metrics average of 58.33
USC (54) - 17-13, yikes, 1-8 in Q1A, 2-9 in Q1, Q3 loss
SDSU (55) - 19-10, 0-3 Q1A, 2-7 Q1, Q3 loss
McNeese (56) - 24-5, no Q1 wins, Q4 loss, but somehow the least objectionable resume on this list if you like mid-major ball.
Oklahoma (57) - 17-14, yikes, 1-5 in Q1A, 5-5 Q2
Seton Hall (58) - 0-4 Q1A, 1-5 Q1, 2 Q3 losses
Arizona St. (59) - 1-8 Q1A, 4-11 Q1, 68.33 efficiency metrics average, Q4 loss
Belmont (62) - 0-0 in Q1, 4 Q3 losses, efficiency metrics average of 79.33
Cincinnati (63) - 2-6 Q1A, 3-11 Q1, Q4 loss
Anyone that is telling you they want expansion (so basically just the suits in Indianapolis) is telling you they want EIGHT, count ‘em EIGHT of those teams in the field to get to 76. That is a truly shocking statement, and we need to put the resumes out there so people can see how badly they want to dilute this. If you expand the field, it’s only a matter of time before a 16-15 SEC/B1G team gets into the field.
Fuck expansion.
Anyway, here’s your bracket: