Alsacs, I give you a lot of credit for being vociferous about something I've believed for several years. "Bracketology" is worthless, and ultimately is a futile endeavor.
The landscape changes on a daily basis, so having it in Nov / Dec is pointless, despite the attention it garners. And Lunardi completely miscalculates by having his tabulations focus upon the daily outcomes, ignoring the long term view.
Perhaps most importantly, the evaluative bias he brings consistently is off target, given that each committee is slightly different and prioritizes slightly different evaluative criteria. So while he has a uniform view from year to year [generally] of who belongs in, it doesn't necessarily reflect the deliberations taking place behind closed doors.
Give him credit--he is basically a hack reporter who stumbled upon something that makes him relevant. Professionally, he nailed a cool niche [much like Mel Kiper]. But that doesn't change that it is generally a pointless endeavor.
