A look at the intriguing bracketing situation at play heading into the D3 Softball National Tournament
What happens when a significant percentage of a D3 tournament's top seeds are in relatively isolated geographical areas? It appears we'll find out soon enough.
Rare is it that I deviate from the singular focus of this newsletter—Division III women’s basketball—but today, I’m making an exception. It’s relevant in the overall landscape of Division III sports and the new NPI world we’re operating in. And let’s face it, who doesn’t love the intensity and passion (and drama) that comes with the immediate leadup to the national tournament?
As calendars turn from April to May, we’ve reached the point for D3’s spring sports that comes for those of us in basketball during the final weeks of February. It’s the juncture when the at-large bid “bubble” begins taking shape. When conference tournaments bring about upsets, come-from-behind wins, and all the emotions that go along with the reality that, for most teams, their season’s fate comes down to a play here or there and how well they perform over a three or four-day span. It is part of what makes tournament time so thrilling; the leadup is often as action-packed as the tournament itself.
And that’s where D3 softball finds itself as I write this on Monday afternoon.
While much of my national media work in D3 has surrounded football and basketball, I’ve avidly followed the baseball and softball scene around the country since I began covering Mary Hardin-Baylor athletics back in 2020. It helps that my home state of Texas has produced numerous high-caliber programs in those two sports in recent years, including the 2019 and 2024 softball national champions.
So when we entered this spring, I was curious to see how the newly-adopted NCAA Power Index (NPI) selection/ranking system would affect a sport like softball. Unlike basketball, which I was obviously most familiar with from an NPI perspective, softball regular season schedules span over 40 games. Most leagues play some form of a weekend series format, with conference opponents facing off 3 and 4 times in a season, far different from basketball, where playing one team 3 times in the regular season is unheard of. And in an outdoor sport played in the spring, there’s a real difference between the kind of schedule, say, East Texas Baptist can play compared to UW-Oshkosh.
That creates some interesting dynamics in terms of when teams play games over the months of February, March, and April, and in a lot of cases, how much of a percentage their conference schedule comprises of the overall regular season slate. With all that considered, it seemed softball (and baseball) would be an interesting part of the ongoing analysis into NPI’s effect in different sports compared to the old system. It definitely has been that, though I’m not sure we’ve seen anything incredibly surprising compared to what we witnessed through the fall and spring. I will say, however, that I didn’t anticipate the significant drops we’ve seen from teams who fall in a 3-game series or doubleheader to a much lower-ranked opponent. With 40+ games, I had figured the impact of a loss (or even back-to-back losses in a doubleheader) would be minimized compared to what we saw in basketball, considering that singular result made up a smaller percentage of the team’s overall body of work. But we’ve seen a handful of teams get swept in a doubleheader and drop 15-20 spots the following day. I won’t be surprised to see more of that as we go into a major week over conference tournaments over the next seven days, leading up to Monday’s selection announcement.
I’ve buried the lede here, though. Because the main point in writing this surrounds the unique bracketing situation the national committee is (likely) soon to find itself in, with NPI playing a role in it. Since early in this season, it’s been clear that Region 10 is the strongest region in D3 softball. And quite possibly the deepest at the same time. For those unfamiliar with the regional setup of D3, Region 10 is made up of schools west of the Mississippi River, both in the Texas/Arkansas/Louisiana area of the South, and the collection of West Coast programs in the SCIAC and NWC.
Since the NCAA began updating softball NPI a few weeks ago, that strength in the South and West — D3’s lesser-populated regions — revealed itself majorly in the top end of the rankings. At points, four of the Top 10 in NPI were Region 10 programs. That isn’t something you see in most other sports in D3, where the high-caliber teams tend to be skewed further to the east.
Now, Region 10’s success in softball isn’t new; ETBU won the national title last year, Linfield reached the D3 world series in 2023, and Texas Lutheran went in both 2021 and 2022. Because of that, it wasn’t hard to see this coming. But based on what we know of the bracketing principles that are used, and the introduction of a system that gives a true 1-to-64 seeding system (as opposed to the old system, which had no formal seeds, nor a national ranking system), it makes for a very intriguing situation as to how the committee will approach it.
Top 8 seeds are protected, which throws in the first big wrinkle
For the first time, like in other sports, the No. 1 and No. 2 seeds in each quadrant (forming the Top 8 seeds overall) are unable to be bracketed to meet any earlier than in the Round of 8, which in this case, would be the D3 Women’s College World Series in Bloomington, Illinois. It is based on this that the committee cannot put two Top 8 seeds in the same regional, even if doing so would save money on travel (which is especially applicable in this situation). The same goes for the two-team Super Regionals, forcing the Supers to be No. 1 vs. No. 4, and No. 2 vs. No. 3, if chalk were to hold through the opening weekend.
This is the foundation of the bracket, because of the stipulations placed on where these teams can actually be. And to be clear, while Region 10 throws some big challenges in with the geographical layout, this isn’t a Region 10-only challenge for the committee to contend with. Let’s look at our current Top 8: ETBU, Rowan, Virginia Wesleyan, Christopher Newport, Trine, Redlands, Linfield, and Huntingdon. So in this, 3 of the 8 are in Region 10, with two of those in places that can only be accessed by bus by (likely) one, maybe two, other teams in the field. And those are conference opponents. Then you have Virginia Wesleyan and CNU, who are just down the road from each other (27 miles) but can’t face off in the Super Regionals. Huntingdon might as well be in Region 10 itself, with its Montgomery, Alabama campus only within bussing distance of a couple likely tournament teams (Belhaven, Emory, and Transylvania), meaning if the Hawks were to advance beyond the regional round, they’ll need to fly to a Super Regional (or have someone fly to them).
So that’s Challenge #1: Besides Rowan and Trine, the Top 8s aren’t all that easily accessible within the 500 mile rule (CNU and VA Wesleyan are out on the coast, which takes out the possibility of most NESCAC/NEWMAC teams bussing there). This could create a lot of extra flights for the Super Regionals, thus cutting into the available flights to be used for Regionals.
Expanding the view to Top 16s adds to the challenges
But it’s not only in the Top 8. The Top 16 (No. 1 seeds in each pod) has several more potentially-problematic cases within it, too. Texas Lutheran, who was a Top 8 until this weekend, is sitting at No. 12. Belhaven moved into the Top 16 with its CCS Tournament win over Huntingdon. Salisbury at No. 10 is much like CNU and Virginia Wesleyan in geographic setup, which has advantages and disadvantages.
The biggest takeaway here? We will find out how much the committee can prioritize true seeding. I use “can” there, because in a perfect world, I think every committee member would support a 1-through-64 bracket for the sake of competitiveness and balanced regionals. But that’s not really the question here. It’s ultimately how much they’ll be able to stick to each team’s true seeding, and how drastically they’ll have to change seed lines to fit their bracket within the budget given by the NCAA.
If there is, say, only 4 flights available to be used for the first weekend (this is completely an example, not based on any fact!), we could see Belhaven grouped with Huntingdon and Texas Lutheran grouped with ETBU (essentially two pods with two #1 seeds). This seems like it will ultimately come down to how many flights are being saved for Super Regionals, and where the priorities of the committee are. Is it in balanced regionals, or Super Regional hosting for Top 8s, or a different aspect of the bracket? We’ll find out, but there are several different ways this could go. If you remember in women’s basketball, Whitman was flown to UW-Stout to, based on what I understand, preserve a flight to keep each of the Top 4 in line to host Sectionals (NYU didn’t host because the NYU men were at home, but it was bracketed to allow for the women to host if an opportunity was there). We could see something similar in softball, with a few higher seeds flown out of their region to make room for the Top 8s to host Supers the following week, should an opportunity be presented.
And since I bring up the hosting topic, that’s the other major aspect of this. Look at the NPI rankings and you’ll see what I’m saying. It’s the core reason why the D3 Softball committee is likely to end up in such a challenging spot here in a few days. The Top 32—the programs in position to be No. 1 and No. 2 seeds in four-team pods—are generally more western and southern located, while the teams on those No. 9 to No. 16 seed lines are more eastern-located. There aren’t enough northeast hosts to fit all the lower-seeded teams in the field without using flights, shifting seed lines to a drastic degree, or hosting a pod at the No. 3 seed in the four-team regional to help fit the bracket into the budget. But then you have to start asking if any of those No. 3 seeds even put in bids to host, especially in a spring sport where many schools have already ended classes by May 15 and have very few student workers still on campus.
Scott Peterson put out a mock bracket yesterday that did a nice job of attacking and solving some of these potential issues. He has 14 of the Top 16 seeds hosting regionals, which is pretty good considering the situation. Belhaven (#16 overall) ends up bussing to WashU, a No. 6 seed. Texas Lutheran (#12 overall) is sent on a flight to Illinois Wesleyan. Everyone else in that group would be at home in this scenario laid out by Scott.
But even then, a look at the mock bracket is what I’m bringing up about the committee's ability to even avoid moving seed lines and minimize flights. Scott has Husson flying to Illinois Wesleyan, John Jay flying to ETBU, Tufts flying to Linfield, Mass-Boston flying to Redlands, to name a few. In total, he has 7 first-weekend flights, attempting to keep TLU and ETBU from ending up in the same regional. I guess we’ll have to find out how much of that the committee can do within the framework given by the NCAA. If too many flights are an issue, expect some fairly unbalanced pods in this tournament. At best, a few teams might move 2-3 seed lines in some places to bus to a regional rather than fly. At worst, we may end up needing to just throw seeds out the window in a lot of these pods.
Region 10’s role
And none of this would really be a huge deal if not for the amount of Region 10 teams currently positioned to be in the field as top seeds. Using @D3Softball’s Tournament Field Graphic (through games on 5/4), nine Region 10 teams would be in if the season ended today, four of which are in the Top 16, with 2 more in the Top 32. So how do you reward the strong resumes built by those programs, without breaking the budget? That’s the burning question.
Like in basketball, conference opponents cannot match up in the first round, though that doesn’t prohibit conference opponents from being in the same regional. Even still, you’re looking at an exorbitant amount of flight costs if you let all four R10 Top 16s host on the first weekend. It’d be 2 flights to Linfield, 2 to Redlands, 2 to Texas Lutheran, and at least 1 to ETBU. And that is with throwing any thought of accurately-seeded pods out the window! There are no true 13-to-16 seeds in Region 10 (these would be No. 4 seeds in a regional pod), so you either create an incredibly strong regional for your No. 1 overall seed (ETBU) but let them host, or you use a flight to get a team from the east to Texas. Linfield and Redlands are even more difficult, considering you’d be putting them in a regional with a conference opponent AND using four total flights to the west coast. Of course, the alternative is flying one or both to the midwest or east, and setting them up as the No. 1 seed in a regional hosted by the No. 2 or No. 3 in the pod. Remember, you’re already having to prepare for both West Coast teams to get through, and set aside flights to send two teams west. And unlike women’s basketball this year, where the SCIAC and NWC were both 1-bid leagues, you’re dealing with the strong possibility of both being 2-bid leagues. In that case, you might as well send two teams out west, but again, that’s 4 flights on the first weekend on two regionals alone.
The bracketology on this is incredibly tough. We’ve heard committee chairs in other sports state multiple times that there is no given directive on the number of flights that can be used. But it always seems there’s an ideal number set by the NCAA, whether clearly-stated or not. And it’s hard to think this year’s softball bracket won’t exceed that number, even for as much as seed lines are shifted and regionals are hosted by lower seeds further to the east.
The success of Region 10 teams is driving this, and it feels like we’re heading for a pretty indicative point in the NPI and overall D3 landscape. Either the NCAA puts out a bracket that has multiple Top 16s in the same regionals, likely causing another significant uproar with true seeds now attributed to each team in the field, or additional flights are given to accommodate the unique situation, potentially setting a precedent for future scenarios in softball and other sports down the road.
That’s a big reason why I thought it was necessary to bring this up, even on a D3 women’s basketball-centric newsletter. More than in Division I or Division II, Division III’s landscape does not greatly vary from sport to sport. There are obviously numerous differences in each sport’s setup when it comes to brackets and tournament selection procedure, but you also have a decent amount of crossover, especially with the role geography plays in the bracketing process. Whether it’s tennis or soccer or softball, there will always be a challenge with the isolated teams in the field, whether in the south or west. But I can’t remember a case with this many Region 6s and Region 10s in the upper echelon, putting much more attention on those types of teams rather than just taking a simple route to bracket three Texas teams and one from the west coast together.
Comparison to WBB
For some context, how does the current softball situation vary from this past year’s women’s basketball bracket?
Women’s basketball had a Top 16 team per NPI in 9 of the 10 regions, meaning a regional pod was hosted in 9 of the 10 regions, including 7 from Regions 1-5. Because of D3’s large quantity of east coast conferences, which all have AQs, pods at Catholic, Smith, Scranton, Johns Hopkins, etc., were helpful in keeping the bracket balanced, and the number of first-weekend flights low. Softball, at the present moment, has 3 Top 16 teams from Regions 1-5. That’s a major difference.
That doesn’t mean there’s a significantly lower number of east coast teams in the field. All the mid-to-low tier conferences with AQs in women’s hoops have AQs in softball, so those teams are all there. The difference is that Rowan, Gettysburg, and Salisbury are the only hosts (if you’re only using Top 16 teams) in those regions, while 13 of the No. 13 to No. 16 seeds (No. 4 seeds in a regional pod) are from those same five regions. You can’t bus Husson or Nichols or Johnson & Wales (RI) to Baldwin Wallace. Or Virginia Wesleyan. Or Christopher Newport. Certainly not Trine. Perhaps the best indicator of the varying geographical layout in women’s basketball vs softball is in the highest ranked team from each of the regions. In women’s hoops, the top-ranked Region 1 team was No. 1 overall (Bowdoin). In softball, Region 1’s top-ranked team is Tufts…at No. 31, barely a No. 8 seed. Region 2 in women’s basketball had Smith at No. 11. Softball’s best is Springfield, sitting at No. 37. Ithaca, at No. 25, is the highest-ranked out of Regions 1-3.
And all those leagues that had only a single bid in women’s basketball, like the SCIAC, NWC, ASC, and CCS, are in position to be multi-bid leagues now. That’s more of a challenge than it is a positive from a bracketing standpoint for west coast teams. With single-bid leagues—Whitman to Stout’s regional is the best example—you can take a Top 16, fly them to a more geographically-saturated part of the country, and host a well-seeded pod that only requires a single flight. But as soon as you hit 2 bids, you’re probably now looking at 2 flights either way. So even though you can now give a team like Linfield the opportunity to host because two NWC programs are in the field, you’re using double the number of flights you would have used to fly the NWC champ to the midwest or east.
Anyways, I’ve gone on long enough. If you’re still reading, I appreciate you sticking with me and hopefully this was insightful in some way! If there’s interest, I’ll put together a shorter update on Sunday night, once the 64-team field has been set. I know Scott Peterson has been doing some great work on this, from a mileage and bracketology standpoint, and I’ve appreciated his perspective and insights as we’ve conversed on this topic over the last week or so. For anyone that wants to reach out (whether connected with D3 Softball or not), feel free to do so. I’m more than happy to answer any questions and get some better insight on this topic. You can use the message feature below, email me at rileyzayas@gmail.com, or DM on X at @ZayasRiley.