Lunardi

[Alsacs]

The majority of the brackets on bracketmatrix had us out, and the majority of posters on this board had us out. It's not like Lunardi's projection was far-fetched.

I call it the way I see it. I am critical when its appropriate and give praise when its warranted. I had us in end the entire time until the 2nd bracket came out then the leak came out.
This wasn't a shocker. I called Lunardi out the entire time. I have no problem if you break down the numbers and come to your own conclusions but looking at the crap Lunardi threw out it was not far-fetched to destroy him.

 

[Cusefan0307]

These bracketologists have failed to realize that they put way to much emphasis on the RPI and the committee virtually ignores it these days as there is much better metrics out there that measure team capabilities. Good to see the committee ignore this outdated/antiquated metric. It's a metric that overvalues playing/beating garbage teams on the road and I think the committee is finally seeing it for what it is.

 

[Eric15]

This wasn't a shocker. I called Lunardi out the entire time. I have no problem if you break down the numbers and come to your own conclusions but looking at the crap Lunardi threw out it was not far-fetched to destroy him.

You made a great prediction, then. But come on, it was definitely a shocker. After they announced Vandy got in the board went into mourning mode.

 

[Cusefan0307]

I really don't think it was a shocker to the people who looked at the metrics like Alsacs, Pearl, Jncuse etc...

Everyone who said we definately weren't getting in were focusing on metrics that have become outdated and no longer used, and the myth that the NCAA was out to get us.

 

[Alsacs]

You made a great prediction, then. But come on, it was definitely a shocker. After they announced Vandy got in the board went into mourning mode.

I was fairly certain all week we were in until I saw Vandy/Wichita State got in then literally 3o seconds later on twitter I saw the leaked bracket.

My opinion aside Lunardi is terrible at doing his job. He isn't consistent in his evaluations and uses biases way too much. He is the Frank Luntz of Bracketologists. He is a hired gun who comes to the conclusions he wants instead of what the facts may otherwise say.

 

[SU2NASA]

You're taking what he does way too seriously. It's light-hearted entertainment.

He sure doesn't think so.

 

[CorduroyG]

The majority of the brackets on bracketmatrix had us out, and the majority of posters on this board had us out. It's not like Lunardi's projection was far-fetched.

as someone said many of the bracketologists online are based on lunardi's. if he had us in then most would have us in. palm had us in, bilas had us in, seth davis had us in, jay williams had us in, seth greenburg had us in, someone posted a link to a guy who was 68 for 68 last year and he had us in. if lunardi said "its gonna be close with syracuse theyre right on the bubble but i have them just out" thats 1 thing. but he had us clearly out, it wasnt even close, in fact he tweeted yesterday morning his first 4 out and we werent on it lol. hes biased, thats the only reason to justify his giving cuse literally no chance.

 

[Alsacs]

He sure doesn't think so.

Exactly if Lunardi just said well I was way and off need to adjust how I evaluate atleast then it show some humility.

Instead,he doubled down on why he was right and they were wrong. The stuff he threw out was laughable. Literally as if people don't have access to the same info he does.

 

[Knicks411]

I really don't think it was a shocker to the people who looked at the metrics like Alsacs, Pearl, Jncuse etc...

Everyone who said we definately weren't getting in were focusing on metrics that have become outdated and no longer used, and the myth that the NCAA was out to get us.

It wasn't a shocker to me that we got in, but after they announced the first half of the field (and prior to the leak) based on who had made it in, I didn't like our chances.

Also, I think Lunardi is off on his evaluation of us, but I can't kill him and say things like "he's supposed to know who is going to make it" etc. How can you predict freaking Tulsa making it?

 

[SU2NASA]

How can you predict freaking Tulsa making it?

That's what he's paid to do. To know more than the rest of us.

 

[kirbivore]

The majority of the brackets on bracketmatrix had us out, and the majority of posters on this board had us out. It's not like Lunardi's projection was far-fetched.

my slight lean towards SU not making was based on NCAA paranoia, not the numbers.

 

[Knicks411]

That's what he's paid to do. To know more than the rest of us.

I think he's paid to get clicks for ESPN, which he does.

Literally no one in the bracket matrix had Tulsa. You're holding him to a standard you're seemingly not holding anyone else to because he didn't have SU in the field.

 

[FrancoPizza]

I had a drink and was enjoying it(and also decided to enjoy the rage instead of letting it annoy me), while others were raging like they were being subjected to prison s e x for the first time.

Are you saying it gets better after the first time?

 

[SU2NASA]

I think he's paid to get clicks for ESPN, which he does.

Literally no one in the bracket matrix had Tulsa. You're holding him to a standard you're seemingly not holding anyone else to because he didn't have SU in the field.

I hold all of these so-called "experts" to a higher standard than some random like me. They're compensated to know more about their field, and yet they don't. Sure, he gets clicks, but this idiotic "Bracketologist" title is more idiotic than the name itself.

I can't stand the "no one could have predicted that". No, you're paid to predict it. Maybe that's why I prefer to put sports these days on the side TVs of the triscreen and let my wife have the main screen, so I don't have to listen to idiotic color commentators and mouth breathers like Lunardi.

 

[Knicks411]

Well, literally not one single bracketologist predicted Tulsa in the field.

Sorry, no one in the bracket matrix, looks like 1 out of 150 in the bracket project got them.

 

[dasher]

Well, he innovated "bracketology", and it took. It took, big time. Good for him. He came up with a silly idea and someone bought it. Do you all realize that his opinions are considered in no way whatsoever by the selection committee? And that his opinions influence absolutely nobody and absolutely nothing? So what if ESPN flashes them on the ticker. He's just a shmuck - yes, a total shmuck (I concede that) who gets to get paid for being a college hoops fan 24/7/365. Gotta love it. Again, the anger here is comical. Enjoy your day jobs!

I don't get your take. So it's okay to criticize any other walk of life but not Lunardi? Are we jealous of a coach when we criticize them? The guy sucks at his job. Of that, there is no debate. He has a bias. once again, there is no debate. His job is to predict which teams the committee will select. It isn't to criticize the committee when he gets it wrong.

 

[dasher]

Exactly if Lunardi just said well I was way and off need to adjust how I evaluate atleast then it show some humility.

Instead,he doubled down on why he was right and they were wrong. The stuff he threw out was laughable. Literally as if people don't have access to the same info he does.

And that the committee is made up of 10 people. Not just one. One person can't put Syracuse in and keep Monmouth out.

 

[dasher]

I think he's paid to get clicks for ESPN, which he does.

Literally no one in the bracket matrix had Tulsa. You're holding him to a standard you're seemingly not holding anyone else to because he didn't have SU in the field.

Anyone doing brackets for ESPN would get clicks. Anyone. They might as well pick someone who is good at it.

 

[CaptainJ]

Are you saying it gets better after the first time?

Like with anything some people hate at first(for me the taste of coffee and beer, off the top of my head), I'm guessing it very well may. I won't make any guarantees, it's really a YMMV thing.

 

[CaptainJ]

I hold all of these so-called "experts" to a higher standard than some random . . . . . . . like me. They're compensated to know more about their field, and yet they don't. Sure, he gets clicks, but this idiotic "Bracketologist" title is more idiotic than the name itself.

I can't stand the "no one could have predicted that". No, you're paid to predict it. Maybe that's why I prefer to put sports these days on the side TVs of the triscreen and let my wife have the main screen, so I don't have to listen to idiotic color commentators and mouth breathers like Lunardi.

I'm guessing your wife must be grateful that you don't like Lunardi. I can imagine it must be harder to follow most shows without the sound!

 

[Bornorange]

You seem like a level headed fellow, and I dig that. You may have been amazed by the RAGE directed at the selection show today! I had a drink and was enjoying it(and also decided to enjoy the rage instead of letting it annoy me), while others were raging like they were being subjected to prison s e x for the first time. I really couldnt understand why people were choosing to be so miserable while I was having a blast with a cold beverage and feeling excited about my team! Thoughts?

I did nor watch the show, reading the selection show thread here was far more entertaining.