The NCAA Division I Men’s Basketball Championship selection process is led by a 12-member committee responsible for identifying the 37 best at-large teams to join 31 automatic qualifiers, completing the 68-team field that will compete for a national championship. Throughout the regular season and conference tournaments, the Division I Men’s Basketball Committee closely tracks the national landscape—watching games, analyzing statistical profiles and results, reviewing weekly polls and rankings, and applying established principles and procedures—to build the tournament bracket with accuracy and fairness.

Below is a detailed look at the meticulous, behind-the-scenes work that prepares teams, fans, and media for the pinnacle of the basketball season: March Madness.

What is the process to create the 68-team tournament bracket for the NCAA Division I Men’s Basketball Championship?

The 68 tournament teams are comprised of 31 automatic qualifiers — teams that win their conference tournaments – and 37 at-large teams. The NCAA Division I Men’s Basketball Committee uses a combination of metrics and evaluation tools to choose the at-large teams.

The NCAA uses a three-phase process to create the 68-team tournament bracket:

• Select the 37 best at-large teams.
• Seed the field of 68 teams.
• Place the teams into the championship bracket.

What principles are in place to select, seed and place the teams into the championship bracket?

• The committee selects the 37 best at-large teams, with no limit on how many may come from one conference.
• The committee aims to achieve reasonable competitive balance across all regions of the tournament bracket.

Conflict-of-interest rules

• A committee member cannot be present during discussions or seeding of a team they represent as an athletics director or commissioner.
• Members may provide only general, factual information about teams from their own conference.
• Members cannot vote for a team they represent.
• A conference-office representative may not participate in discussion or voting for a team that intends to transition into their conference.
• Members must recuse themselves from discussion or voting if an immediate family member is: 
  • A men’s basketball student-athlete.
  • A member of the men’s basketball coaching staff.
  • A senior athletics administrator at that institution.
• When recused members return, they receive a neutral update from the NCAA VP of Men’s Basketball, not other committee members.

Chair-specific rules

• If the committee chair’s institution is still on the under-consideration board when all but four at-large teams have been chosen, the chair must leave the room.
• If the chair’s institution ends up among the last four at-large teams, the chair cannot publicly comment on that team; the vice chair handles all questions.

Voting integrity

• All committee voting is conducted by secret ballot.

Who is on the Division I Men’s Basketball Committee?

Composition: 

12 members are selected to five-year terms. 

• One representative from each autonomy conference. 
• Four representatives from the seven highest ranked nonautonomy conferences (based on basketball success*). 
• Four representatives selected from nonautonomy conferences (ranked 12-31 by basketball success*). 

*Basketball success is defined as total conference appearances plus total conference wins in the previous five NCAA championships, excluding First Four wins. 

Keith Gill, Commissioner, Sun Belt Conference – Chair

Conference affiliation: Sun Belt Conference
Term expiration: August 2026

Gill has been the commissioner for the Sun Belt since 2019 and previously worked for the Atlantic 10 Conference, where he was executive associate commissioner, working with former Men’s Basketball Committee member Bernadette McGlade. Gill is the first African American to become commissioner of a NCAA Football Bowl Subdivision conference. He also served as the director of athletics at both Richmond and American, spending five years on each campus. Gill also worked in the athletics departments at Oklahoma and Vanderbilt and had two stints working in the membership services department at the NCAA national office. A four-year football letterman at Duke, Gill graduated from the university in 1994 and later earned a master’s degree from Oklahoma. 

Greg Byrne, Director of Athletics, Alabama

Conference affiliation: Southeastern Conference 
Term expiration: August 2026

Byrne has been the director of athletics at Alabama since 2017. Prior to that, he served in the same role at Arizona and Mississippi State, and also worked in the athletics departments at Kentucky, Oregon State and Oregon. Following in the footsteps of his father Bill Byrne, who enjoyed a 30-year career as an athletics director, the younger Byrne has spent a lifetime around major college athletics. Since Byrne took the reins, Alabama student-athletes have also earned some of the nation’s top academic honors, including the NCAA Impact Award, NCAA Elite Scholar-Athlete Award, College Sports Communicators Academic All-America of the Year honors, NCAA and SEC Postgraduate Scholarships and dozens of Academic All-America accolades. A native of Pocatello, Idaho, Byrne earned a bachelor’s degree from Arizona State in 1994 and a master’s degree from Mississippi State in 2009.

Mark Coyle, Director of Athletics, Minnesota

Conference affiliation: Big Ten Conference
Term expiration: August 2026

Coyle was named Minnesota’s athletics director in May 2016. A former athletic administrator at Minnesota, he returned to Gopher Athletics after serving as athletics director at Syracuse and Boise State and as deputy athletics director at Kentucky. During his first tenure at Minnesota, from 2001 to 2005, Coyle served as associate athletic director for external relations, a role in which he was responsible for managing the marketing and sales unit, athletic communications, the ticket office, and licensing. A former football student-athlete, Coyle graduated from Drake with his bachelor’s degree in English in 1991. He earned his master's degree in teaching from Drake in 1992 and a master's degree in sports administration from Florida State in 1993.

Irma Garcia, Director of Athletics, Manhattan

Conference affiliation: Metro Atlantic Athletic Conference 
Term expiration: August 2029

Garcia has served at the helm of the Manhattan athletic department since 2023. Prior to that, she spent 35 years at St. Francis College first as the women’s basketball coach from 1988-99, then as the associate athletics director from 1999-2007 and then as the athletics director from 2007-23. Garcia earned her undergraduate degree from St. Francis in 1980 while playing basketball for four years. Upon graduating, she served as a physical education instructor and girls basketball coach at St. Joseph by-the-Sea High School on Staten Island for eight years. She later earned a master’s from Brooklyn College. Garcia was the Northeast Conference women’s basketball Coach of the Year in 1998, won the FCS Administrator of the Year in 2014-15 from the group now called Women Leaders in Sports, and a year later received Division I-AAA Under Armour Athletic Director of the Year honors. The Brooklyn native has also served on the Division I Women’s Basketball Oversight Committee.

Stu Jackson, Commissioner, West Coast Conference

Conference affiliation: West Coast Conference
Term expiration: August 2028

Jackson has been the commissioner of the West Coast Conference since 2023. Before that, he was executive associate commissioner for men’s basketball for the Big East Conference for nearly nine years. Jackson served as head coach at Wisconsin from 1992-94, leading the Badgers to their first NCAA tournament berth in 47 years. He also held coaching positions at Providence, Washington State and Oregon, and he served on the NCAA Rules and Competition Committee. Jackson also spent 13 years working for the NBA, serving first as senior vice president and later as executive vice president of basketball operations. Jackson also served as president and general manager of the expansion Vancouver Grizzlies from 1994-2000, as assistant coach and later head coach of the New York Knicks from 1987-91.

Arthur Johnson, VP/Director of Athletics, Temple

Conference affiliation: American Conference
Term expiration: August 2028

Johnson is the vice president and director of athletics at Temple, a position he has held since 2021. He earned both his bachelor’s and master’s degrees from Georgia and served his alma mater as associate athletics director for internal operations and as the primary administrator for men’s basketball from 2005-11. He also served as senior associate athletics director for football operations for three years, and as senior associate athletics director for administration and operations for seven years, at Texas. The Thomasville, Georgia, native also held the positions of administrative assistant for football operations at North Carolina in 1999 and the manager of football operations at Arizona State from 1996-99.

Zack Lassiter, VP/Director of Athletics, Abilene Christian

Conference affiliation: Western Athletic Conference 
Term expiration: August 2029

Lassiter is the vice president for athletics at Abilene Christian, a position he has held since 2021. Prior to that, Lassiter served as deputy athletics director for external operations at Oregon State from 2015-21. There, he was the sport supervisor for men’s basketball as the Beavers made two NCAA tournament appearances, including their first Pac-12 Conference championship and a run to the Elite Eight in 2021. Before his time in Corvallis, Lassiter served on the executive team at the University of Central Florida for three years after arriving from Utah, where he spent more than six years in athletics administration and served an integral role during the 2010 West Regional in Salt Lake City.

Martin Newton, Director of Athletics, Samford

Conference affiliation: Southern Conference
Term expiration: August 2027

Newton has been overseeing the athletics department at Samford since 2011. Newton was an All-Conference honorable mention basketball player at Samford, earning his degree from the university in 1983. He then spent more than a quarter century working in marketing for major shoe companies before going to Kentucky in 2009. During his two-year stay in Lexington, he managed the budget, fundraising, compliance, scheduling, marketing, and academic support for the men’s basketball program. A recognized leader in collegiate athletics, Newton is a member of the NCAA’s Council Coordination Committee, the Division I Administrative Committee and the Men’s Basketball Oversight Committee. Newton is the son of the late C.M. Newton, the legendary college basketball player, coach and administrator, who served on the men’s basketball committee from 1992-99 and chaired it his final two years while the athletics director at Kentucky.

Lee Reed, Director of Intercollegiate Athletics, Georgetown

Conference affiliation: Big East Conference 
Term expiration: August 2027

Reed, who has been the athletics director at Georgetown since 2010, has been in athletics administration for more than 30 years, starting as an intern for the National Association of Collegiate Directors of Athletics in 1994. He also spent seven years at Eastern Michigan before being named director of athletics at Cleveland State in 2002. He held that position for eight years before landing at Georgetown. A former team captain on the basketball team at Cleveland State, Reed also has coaching experience, having served as an assistant coach for the men’s basketball team at New Mexico. Nearly a quarter-century after serving his internship, Reed became the president of NACDA for the 2018-19 season. That came on the heels of being a 2017 NACDA Athletics Director of the Year Award recipient. Reed also chairs the Big East Conference Men’s Basketball Issues Working Group, and is a mentor for the NCAA’s Pathway Program, which is designed to elevate senior-level athletics administrators.

Chad Weiberg, VP of Athletic Programs & Director of Athletics, Oklahoma State

Conference affiliation: Big 12 Conference 
Term expiration: August 2029

Weiberg has been a fixture within the Big 12 Conference, especially at Oklahoma State. He began working in the athletics department in 1994, serving as the director of corporate sales and donor relations for five years before moving to the alumni office and working as the school’s senior director of field operations. Weiberg then spent a year as director of development for the Oklahoma State Foundation, followed by a year in the same role for the athletics department. He left Stillwater for Manhattan, Kansas, in 2004, serving one year as the Kansas State Foundation’s director of corporate relations, four years as the athletics department’s director of major gifts, and six years as associate athletics director for development. He was named deputy athletics director at Texas Tech in 2015, spending two years in Lubbock before returning to Oklahoma State. After four years as deputy athletics director, Weiberg was named athletics director in the summer of 2021.

John Wildhack, Director of Athletics, Syracuse

Conference affiliation: Atlantic Coast Conference 
Term expiration: August 2030

Wildhack has been the director of athletics at Syracuse since 2016, returning to his alma mater after a successful career at ESPN that spanned more than three decades. The Buffalo, New York, native received a degree in communications from Syracuse’s Newhouse School of Public Communications and immediately began working as a production assistant for ESPN in 1980. He served in several other production positions before his move to the management track. Wildhack’s managerial role at the company began in 1990 when he was named director of event productions. In 1991, he was promoted to vice president for remote production, a position he held through 1993, when he became senior vice president for remote production. He moved to the programming department as senior vice president for programming in September 1994, and he became senior vice president for programming acquisitions and strategy in 2005. From 2007 to 2012, Wildhack was ESPN’s executive vice president for programming and acquisitions. Before returning to Syracuse, Wildhack served as the network’s executive vice president for programming and production.

Tom Wistrcill, Commissioner, Big Sky Conference

Conference affiliation: Big Sky Conference
Term expiration: August 2027

Wistrcill has been the commissioner of the Big Sky Conference since 2018. Under Wistrcill’s leadership, the conference has signed a long-term deal with ESPN to broadcast all the league’s sports, created and launched a new strategic plan for the next five years and helped the conference become a national leader in broadcast and social media. A graduate of Saint Mary’s (Minnesota), where he played Division III basketball, Wistrcill brings a variety of experience to the committee. In addition to being a Division I commissioner, he also is a former Division I athletics director, having served in that capacity at Akron from 2009-15. During that time, the Zips went to a pair of NCAA men’s basketball tournaments and one NIT, while the women’s team advanced to its first-ever NCAA tournament. Prior to Akron, Wistrcill served as senior associate athletics director at Minnesota and spent seven years as a Division II commissioner at the Northern Sun Intercollegiate Conference and the Rocky Mountain Athletic Conference.

When do members of the committee begin reviewing teams?

Committee members rely on a broad set of observation, consultation, and data resources available to them throughout the season and during selection week to make informed decisions. 

These resources provide the foundation for a thorough and educated process that is reinforced by the committee members’ discussion and deliberation.

Among the resources available to the committee are an extensive season-long evaluation of teams through watching games, conference monitoring calls, NABC tournament advisory committee rankings, complete box scores and results, head-to-head results, results versus common opponents, imbalanced conference schedules and results, overall and non-conference strength of schedule, quality wins and losses, road record, player and coach availability and various computer metrics.

Each of the 12 committee members uses these various resources to form their own opinions, resulting in the committee’s consensus position on teams’ selection and seeding.

What metrics are used by the committee to evaluate teams?

NCAA Statistics, NET, Team Sheets

Phase I: Select the 37 best at-large teams

The committee selects 37 at-large teams (teams not already qualifying automatically).

Initial ballot

• Each committee member receives an alphabetical list of all eligible Division I teams and submits an initial ballot with two parts by a designated time on the first full day of selection meetings.
  • Column 1: Up to 24 teams the member thinks should be at-large selections.
  • Column 2: Any number of teams that deserve consideration for an at-large berth.
• Any team receiving all but three of the eligible votes in Column 1 becomes an automatic at-large selection. 
• Teams receiving at least four votes in either column—or teams that won/shared their regular-season conference title—are placed on the under-consideration board. 
• Teams on this board may be removed with all but three votes or added with at least four votes at any time. 
• Verbal nominations are allowed.

Remaining ballots

• The committee evaluates teams on the under-consideration board through repeated voting rounds. 
• In each round, members select the best teams from the board: 
  • 8 teams when 20+ are under consideration.
  • Up to 6 when 14–19 teams remain.
  • Up to 4 when 13 or fewer remain.
• When 24 or fewer teams remain, members cannot participate if they have a conflict (represent or have family ties to a team in the pool).
• The eight highest-voted teams form the next ballot, and members rank them, with the best team valued at one point. 
• The four lowest-point teams (i.e., highest-ranked) are added to the at-large field; the other four carry over to the next round. 
• Each committee member lists the best eight remaining teams on the under-consideration board. 
• The four teams receiving the most total votes are combined with the four teams carried over from the previous round to form the next at-large ballot.
• This process repeats until all at-large spots are filled. 
• Teams not selected after two straight ranking ballots return to the under-consideration board. 
• The committee chair may adjust the number of eligible teams or number selected per round if needed. 
• A team can be removed from the field by all but three votes and returned to the under-consideration board. 
• After three tied secret voting rounds, the chair breaks the tie. 
• At any point, the committee may begin the seeding process.

Phase II: Seed the field of 68 teams

The committee creates a seed list ranking all 68 teams from strongest to weakest. This list determines the order in which teams are placed into the bracket and remains unchanged once final. Although teams are assigned “true seeds,” placement in the actual bracket may vary, when necessary, to follow NCAA bracketing principles.

How teams are seeded

• Committee members repeatedly vote on groups of teams: 
  • 8 teams listed when 20+ teams remain.
  • Up to 6 teams listed when 14–19 remain.
  • Up to 4 teams listed when 13 or fewer remain.
• When 24 or fewer teams remain, members cannot participate if they have a conflict (represent or have family ties to a team in the pool).

Ballot and ranking process

• The eight teams with the most votes form each seed-list ballot.
• Members rank these eight teams, with the best team valued at one point.
• The four lowest-point teams are added to the official seed list; the other four roll into the next ballot.
• Members then select the best remaining eight teams to form the next ballot.
• The four teams receiving the most total votes are combined with the four teams carried over from the previous round to form the next at-large ballot.
• These steps repeat until all 68 teams are assigned a seed position.

Adjustments & scrubbing

• The chair may adjust the number of eligible teams or number of teams moved per round if needed.
• After teams enter the seed list, they may be moved up or down by a simple-majority vote.  This is called scrubbing, used to refine accuracy.
• Scrubbing applies only to teams already in the field.
• After three tied secret voting rounds, the chair breaks the tie.
• The committee does not have to build the seed list strictly top-to-bottom; it may seed different quadrants at different times.

Phase III: Building the bracket

The NCAA bracket is organized into 16 seed levels (1–16) across four regions, allowing equal comparison of teams on the same seed line. Teams on each seed line should be as equal as possible.

Regions are divided into four quadrants, enabling consistent comparison of equivalent sections across all regions. 

Teams are placed into predetermined bracket groups (seeds 1–16–8–9), (4–13–5–12), (2-15-7-10), (3-14-6-11) and each group is assigned to the same first-/second-round site, with two pods at each site that may feed into different regionals.

Conference Matchup Rules

• The first four teams from any conference placed on the top four seed lines must be assigned to different regions (unless five or more teams appear on those seed lines).
• Teams from the same conference: 
  • Cannot meet before the regional final if they played three or more times during the regular season and conference tournament.
  • Cannot meet before the regional semifinal if they played twice.
  • May meet as early as the second round if they played once or not at all.
• These restrictions may be relaxed if a conference has nine or more teams in the tournament.
• Any principle may be relaxed if two or more of the conference’s teams are among the last four at-large teams in the First Four.
• Top-seeded teams (first four lines) will not be placed where they would face a significant home-crowd disadvantage.

First Four Procedures

• The last four at-large teams plus teams seeded 65–68, compete in the First Four games held on Tuesday and Wednesday.
• Matchups are formed by pairing the last at-large teams against each other and 65 vs. 66, 67 vs. 68.
• First Four teams receive priority placement to the closest first-round site to Dayton, Ohio, with non–First Four teams on the same seed line being placed afterward to optimize travel.
• Winners advance to first and second-round sites selected by the committee.  If Dayton also hosts a first-round site, winners may remain there.

Geographic placement and venue restrictions

• Teams should remain as close to their home region as possible, based on mileage.
• If two teams from the same region compete for the same bracket slot, the higher-seeded team stays local.
• A team cannot play at a venue where it has played more than three games that season (excluding exhibitions and conference tournaments).
• Host institutions cannot play at the site they are hosting, though they may play on the same days.
• Teams are allowed to compete at a site where their conference is serving as the host.
• Additionally, when placing teams into the bracket, the committee may move a team up or down one seed line — and in rare cases, two seed lines — from its true seed to ensure all bracketing principles are properly met.

Core placement steps

• No. 1 seeds placed first:
  The four No. 1 seeds are assigned to the four regions, determining the Final Four semifinal pairings. The overall No. 1 seed chooses its preferred region and first-/second-round site.
• No. 2 seeds placed next:
  Assigned in true-seed order, with flexibility to move teams slightly to avoid placing the No. 5 seed in the same region as the overall No. 1.
  Conference-separation rules cannot be compromised.
• Placement of No. 3 and No. 4 seeds:
  These seeds are placed in each region according to the true-seed list.
• Check for regional balance:
  The committee compares the total seed values within each region to avoid significant imbalance (Preferably, no more than six points should separate the lowest and highest total).
• Assign teams to sites:
  Using true-seed order, each team (and its entire bracket group, e.g., 1-8-9-16) is assigned to first-/second-round sites.
• Place seeds 5–16:
  The remaining seeds are placed according to established principles; all four teams on each seed line share the same numerical value.

Additional considerations

• Avoid early rematches:
  If possible, the committee avoids nonconference rematches in the First Four and first round, and tries to avoid them again in the second round. Teams will not be moved off their true-seed line solely to prevent a rematch.
• Geographic consistency:
  The committee avoids moving teams out of their natural geographical region too frequently based on recent brackets.
• Avoid past-tournament rematches:
  First Four and first-round rematches from the previous year's tournament should be avoided when possible.
• Scheduling constraint for No. 1 seeds:
  If all four No. 1 seeds would normally be placed at Thursday/Saturday sites, the fourth No. 1 seed is moved to the closest Friday/Sunday site to accommodate First Four winners who must play on Friday.

How are teams selected for the National Invitation Tournament?

The NIT selection committee is responsible for selecting the 32-team field.

The selection committee uses a three-phase process to create the 32-team tournament bracket:

• Select the best at-large teams.
• Seed the top 16 teams.
• Place the teams into the bracket.

Selection committee principles

The committee selects the best non-automatic-qualifying teams to fill at-large spots, with no limit on how many teams may come from any single conference. They aim to maintain competitive balance across all regions of the bracket.

Conflict-of-interest rules

• A committee member cannot be present during discussions or seeding of a team they represent as an athletics director or commissioner.
• Members may provide only general, factual information about teams from their own conference.
• Members cannot vote for a team they represent.
• A conference-office representative may not participate in discussion or voting for a team that intends to transition into their conference.
• Members must recuse themselves from discussion or voting if an immediate family member is: 
  • A men’s basketball student-athlete.
  • A member of the men’s basketball coaching staff.
  • A senior athletics administrator at that institution.
• When recused members return, they receive a neutral update from the NIT staff, not other committee members.

Chair-specific rules

• If the committee chair’s institution is still under-consideration board when all but four at-large teams have been chosen, the chair must leave the room.
• If the chair’s institution ends up among the last four at-large teams, the chair cannot publicly comment on that team; the vice chair handles all questions.

Voting integrity

• All committee voting is conducted by secret ballot.

Exempt Teams

The NIT awards 16 exempt bids based on conference affiliation and team data metrics:

Atlantic Coast Conference and Southeastern Conference:

• Each conference receives two exempt bids. These go to the teams with the best average across designated data metrics (BPI, KPI, NET, KenPom, SOR, TOR, WAB), excluding any teams that make the NCAA tournament through automatic or at-large qualification.
  These exempt teams are also eligible to host first-round games.

Top 12 conferences (via KenPom ratings):

• The 12 highest-rated conferences receive one exempt bid each. Within each of those conferences, the team with the best average of the designated metrics receives the bid and may host a first-round game.
  The ACC and SEC may also appear in this top-12 group; if so, their two exempt teams are determined before assigning these conference-based bids.

If a team declines its exempt bid:

• The bid passes to the next eligible team from the same conference based on the same metrics.
• If no eligible replacement exists, the exempt bid is removed entirely, and the number of at-large NIT bids increases by one.

First four out

• The NCAA’s “first four out” teams become the top four seeds in the NIT and are given the chance to host first-round games.
• If any of these teams decline to participate, the remaining “first four out” teams stay as No. 1 seeds, and the NIT committee selects replacement No. 1 seeds.
• If a “first four out” team does not receive one of the 16 exempt bids, then one of the top-12-conference exempt-bid teams loses hosting rights (as determined during NIT seeding).
• If a “first four out” team does receive an exempt bid, that conference does not receive an additional exempt bid. Being a “first four out” team does not prevent a team from earning an exempt bid.

Automatic bids

• Automatic NIT bids go to regular-season conference champions that:
  • Do not make the NCAA Tournament (neither automatic nor at-large), and
  • Have an average ranking of 125 or better across designated data metrics (BPI, KPI, NET, KenPom, SOR, TOR, WAB).
• Automatic-bid teams are not guaranteed to host first-round games.
• If a regular-season champion earning an automatic bid opts out, the bid is eliminated — the conference runner-up does not receive it.
• A team can be both automatic-qualification eligible and exempt-bid eligible:
  • If the team receives an exempt bid, that replaces the automatic bid and grants hosting rights.
  • Exempt status does not prevent a team from being recognized as an automatic qualifier — but the exempt designation takes precedence.
• A conference may receive both an automatic bid and an exempt bid:
  • This occurs if the conference is a top-12 conference, and its regular-season champion is not the conference’s highest-rated eligible team based on the designated metrics.

Phase I: Selecting at-large teams

Initial ballot

Before selection meetings begin, each committee member completes an initial ballot listing eligible Division I teams:

• Column 1 (At-Large Picks):
  • Each member selects 10 to 14 teams they believe should be at-large selections, regardless of exempt-bid possibilities.
• Column 2 (Consideration List):
  • Members list any number of teams they believe deserve at-large consideration. Only teams legitimately warranting discussion should be included.
• Members must not vote for: 
  • Teams that have already earned automatic NCAA bids, or
  • Regular-season champions with a designated-metric average of 125 or better, because those teams may receive NIT automatic bids.
• Any team receiving all but two eligible votes on the initial ballot becomes an at-large selection immediately.
• Teams are added alphabetically if they meet any of the following:
  • Received at least two votes in either column but were not selected at-large.
  • Were nominated by more than one committee member after initial balloting.
  • Were regular-season champions who did not earn NCAA or NIT automatic bids.
• A team can be removed from the board at any time if it receives all but two eligible votes.
• When voting to remove multiple teams and one is represented by a committee member, two separate motions must be made: 
  • One motion including the team tied to the committee member.
  • A second motion for all other teams.
• A team may be added at any time if it receives at least two eligible votes.
• Verbal nominations are allowed throughout the process.

Remaining ballots

• The committee evaluates all teams on the under-consideration board.
• Each member lists the best eight teams, not in ranked order.
• The eight most-voted teams form the next ballot.
• Members then rank those eight teams; the four lowest-point teams (e.g., highest-ranked) are added to the at-large field; the other four carry over to the next round. 
• Each committee member lists the best eight remaining teams on the under-consideration board.
• The four teams receiving the most total votes are combined with the four teams carried over from the previous round to form the next at-large ballot.
• This process repeats until all at-large spots are filled. 
• Teams not selected after two straight ranking ballots return to the under-consideration board. 
• The committee chair may adjust the number of eligible teams or number selected per round if needed. 
• A team can be removed from the field by all but three votes and returned to the under-consideration board. 
• After three tied secret voting rounds, the chair breaks the tie.
• At any point, the committee may begin the seeding process.

Phase II: Seeding of teams

• The committee creates a “seed list” ranking teams 1–16 in true-seed order, based on overall qualitative assessment. This list is used to maintain competitive balance across the four regions.
• The NCAA’s “first four out” teams automatically become the top four seeds in the NIT.
• All exempt-bid teams are placed within the top 16 seeds.
• If a “first four out” team does not receive an exempt bid, then one of the top-12-conference exempt-bid teams loses hosting rights, as determined during NIT seeding.
• Once finalized, the seed list does not change during bracket construction.
• Bracket-building principles (e.g., avoiding matchups between conference teams) may require placing a team outside its true seed position despite the seed list remaining fixed.

Seeding procedures

• The top 16 seeds in the NIT are given the opportunity to host first-round games.
• Depending on how many “first four out” teams receive exempt bids:
• If all four “first four out” teams get exempt bids, the remaining exempt teams are seeded Nos. 5–16.
• If fewer than four “first four out” teams get exempt bids, the remaining exempt teams are seeded Nos. 5–17.
• If there are fewer than 16 combined exempt teams and “first four out” teams, the committee selects at-large teams to fill the top 16.
• Each committee member lists eight top teams (no order) from among exempt-bid and at-large teams. 
• The eight most-voted teams become the next ballot. 
• Members rank these eight teams, with the best team valued at one point.
• The four teams with the lowest point totals are added to the seed list (in order of points). The other four teams carry over to the next ballot. 
• Members then again list the best eight remaining teams, which are combined with carryover teams to form the next ballot. 
• These steps repeat until all teams are seeded 5 through 16 (or the required number). 
• The chair may adjust: 
  • How many teams are eligible to be voted on.
  • How many teams (up to four or fewer) advance to the seed list each round.
• Once a team is seeded, it may be “scrubbed”—moved by simple majority—at any point to ensure accuracy.
  • Scrubbing applies only to seeds 5–16 (the top four are fixed as “first four out” teams). 
• After three rounds of secret voting, any tie is broken by the chair. 
• The seed list does not need to be built strictly sequentially.

Phase III: Building the bracket

Bracketing priorities

The committee’s main goal is to ensure competitive balance across all regions, while keeping teams as geographically close as possible to their natural areas. 

Conference matchups restrictions:

• Teams from the same conference who played twice during the season cannot meet until the quarterfinals.
• Teams from the same conference who played once cannot meet before the second round.

Additional considerations:

• If a team must be moved away from its natural geographic area, it should be placed in the next closest region whenever feasible.
• Regular-season rematches should be avoided in the first round, if possible.

Bracketing procedures

• Place all No. 1 seeds into the bracket to establish the four regions. 
• Place the No. 2 seeds in the region closest to their corresponding No. 1 seeds. 
• Place the No. 3 seeds in the region closest to their corresponding No. 2 seeds. 
• Place the No. 4 seeds in the region closest to their corresponding No. 1 seeds. 

Hosting priority as teams advance:

• Higher-seeded teams receive first choice to host, unless logistical issues prevent it (e.g., travel, lodging, facility limitations, championship guidelines).
• If two unseeded teams advance, the team that is higher on the seed list receives hosting priority.