Will Joe Lunardi EVER get it right?

**Crazyswordsman** · 01-06-2009, 08:09 PM

For those of you who don't know, this guy is the ESPN bracketology guy.

And he came out with his second completely screwed up bracket in a row.

Yeah, I know it's January, but conference play has started and it's right before that time when things will start to settle into their proper places. And it IS the halfway point of the season, number one, and number 2, your conference record can mean various things depending on how good your conference is against other conferences, and what wins you have out of conference.

First of all, his latest bracket, for the second time, excludes UNLV, who I think is one of the most underrated teams in the whole country. And they just beat Louisville on the road (and granted Louisville isn't living up to its hype but a win on the road in a place like Louisville is huge).

Next, there's Arkansas, who is missing from the bracket as well. Like Stanford, they're 11-1. Unlike Stanford, they have a HAYUUUUUGE win over Oklahoma.

Now, there's this little conundrum:

As of yesterday, Team A is 11-2, RPI #49, best win is against RPI #7 Michigan State; worst loss is to RPI #34 Gonzaga.

Team B is 12-2, RPI # 50, best win is against RPI # 11 Miami (OH); worst loss is to RPI # 37 Michigan

Lunardi has Team B with a 3 seed, but Team A is left out of the tournament.

(By the way, Team A is Maryland, and Team B is UCLA).

Maryland and UCLA have a common opponent in Michigan, and Maryland beat them and UCLA lost to them.

Then, he has Boise State winning the WAC, which is a conference that looks like it will be won by Utah State.

Then, he put in Oklahoma as a 1 seed, while dropping still undefeated Wake Forest to a 2 seed (and yes, Wake has been tested on the road).

Utah, who lost to a Division II team, is in according to him. That's just wrong.

Louisville as a 4 seed is wrong. They've failed almost all their tests, passing their lone test against a subpar Kentucky team.

-CSM

Lurch1982 · 01-06-2009, 08:30 PM

You have to factor conference into play. There's no guarantee Maryland will look remotely as good after running the ACC. UCLA OTOH looks pretty much like it would take several injuries to not outright win the conference.

Perrin Aybara · 01-06-2009, 09:32 PM

I'm a Maryland alum and even I don't think Maryland is going to do well this year.

These mid-season brackets before conference play are just pointless.

Maryland would have to play like their freaking pants are on fire to get in.

I mean, our best player is Vasquez. Sad...

It's possible...but it's just as likely (perhaps more so) that they simply get blown out of the ACC.

Here's hoping their pants catch on fire.

-jay

**Crazyswordsman** · 01-06-2009, 10:45 PM

^^UCLA will most likely run the table in the Pac-10, and then will get an early exit from the NCAA tournament when it gets put up against Big East-ACC-Big Ten team No. 5 (out of what looks to be at least 6-7 bids from the latter two conferences and 9-10 for the former).

Lurch, basically your post said what we already know: the ACC is one of the best conferences in the country right now and the Pac-10 is one of the worst (the fact that UCLA still has a top ten ranking is beyond me.....their RPI will probably hover around what it is now. When two teams are very close in the amount of wins, you have to factor in things like RPI). -CSM

Lurch1982 · 01-06-2009, 11:33 PM

I'm with Jay on this one. Basically there's no point in looking at the brackets this early. I MIGHT start looking in mid to late February. Its like looking at Mel Keiper's Big Board in October (or even December) and trying to predict the NFL draft order.

I think you're underestimating UCLA. I don't know if they'll be a Final Four team this year, but they certainly can get a 1 or 2 seed and coast to at least the sweet 16, if not the elite 8.

**Crazyswordsman** · 01-07-2009, 05:42 PM

UCLA hasn't proven themselves to me. I don't even think they're the best team in the Pac-10 right now. Cal and Arizona State have impressed me more, despite the fact that both have a few losses, at least they have some quality wins to go with them. UCLA won't get past the Sweet Sixteen, and they'll probably have trouble making it there.

Also, it seems to me that when a traditional power loses a game, they fall three spots or so in the rankings. When a non-traditional power proves itself against the big dogs and then loses a game, they drop far more. -CSM

ShyGuy727 · 01-08-2009, 11:25 AM

lol maryland.

Lunardi has seven in from the Big Ten in right now. So refreshing to see.

**Crazyswordsman** · 01-09-2009, 05:36 PM

^I saw that. Yeah that silenced me. :P

I will say this: the Big Ten is going to be very, very tough. Penn State beat Purdue recently, for one.

I want my friend who goes to Syracuse to invite me up for the Syracuse-Georgetown game next month.

Oh, and Izzo, Illinois, tUOS, Purdue, Wisconsin, and Minnesota will be in for sure. I'm keeping my fingers crossed for Michigan, but I'm not going to declare them in yet (please don't screw up) -CSM

Lurch1982 · 01-09-2009, 06:21 PM

Again, looking at brackets in January is like booking the World Series in May.

Traditional powers don't drop as far because they're understood to NOT have the dropoff in talent and also tend to schedule harder teams and (as a result of being a power team) have a stronger conference. If some Sun Belt school surges up in the early rankings and then gets handled, they will and should plummet 5 to 10 spots, if not more. They aren't in a deep conference, and they're not exactly deep or proven.

Gonzaga took years before they got respect in the polls. It isn't that a smaller school can't get respect, but it takes years of continued success in order to get the benefit of the doubt.

01-06-2009, 08:09 PM	#1
Crazyswordsman This key doesn't work. Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Booyaville (yeah!) Gender: Posts: 10,791 Thanks: 1,019 Thanked 686 Times in 467 Posts	Will Joe Lunardi EVER get it right? For those of you who don't know, this guy is the ESPN bracketology guy. And he came out with his second completely screwed up bracket in a row. Yeah, I know it's January, but conference play has started and it's right before that time when things will start to settle into their proper places. And it IS the halfway point of the season, number one, and number 2, your conference record can mean various things depending on how good your conference is against other conferences, and what wins you have out of conference. First of all, his latest bracket, for the second time, excludes UNLV, who I think is one of the most underrated teams in the whole country. And they just beat Louisville on the road (and granted Louisville isn't living up to its hype but a win on the road in a place like Louisville is huge). Next, there's Arkansas, who is missing from the bracket as well. Like Stanford, they're 11-1. Unlike Stanford, they have a HAYUUUUUGE win over Oklahoma. Now, there's this little conundrum: As of yesterday, Team A is 11-2, RPI #49, best win is against RPI #7 Michigan State; worst loss is to RPI #34 Gonzaga. Team B is 12-2, RPI # 50, best win is against RPI # 11 Miami (OH); worst loss is to RPI # 37 Michigan Lunardi has Team B with a 3 seed, but Team A is left out of the tournament. (By the way, Team A is Maryland, and Team B is UCLA). Maryland and UCLA have a common opponent in Michigan, and Maryland beat them and UCLA lost to them. Then, he has Boise State winning the WAC, which is a conference that looks like it will be won by Utah State. Then, he put in Oklahoma as a 1 seed, while dropping still undefeated Wake Forest to a 2 seed (and yes, Wake has been tested on the road). Utah, who lost to a Division II team, is in according to him. That's just wrong. Louisville as a 4 seed is wrong. They've failed almost all their tests, passing their lone test against a subpar Kentucky team. -CSM

01-09-2009, 05:36 PM	#8
Crazyswordsman This key doesn't work. Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Booyaville (yeah!) Gender: Posts: 10,791 Thanks: 1,019 Thanked 686 Times in 467 Posts	^I saw that. Yeah that silenced me. :P I will say this: the Big Ten is going to be very, very tough. Penn State beat Purdue recently, for one. I want my friend who goes to Syracuse to invite me up for the Syracuse-Georgetown game next month. Oh, and Izzo, Illinois, tUOS, Purdue, Wisconsin, and Minnesota will be in for sure. I'm keeping my fingers crossed for Michigan, but I'm not going to declare them in yet (please don't screw up) -CSM Last edited by Crazyswordsman; 01-09-2009 at 05:50 PM.

01-06-2009, 08:30 PM	#2
Lurch1982 Senior Member Join Date: May 2000 Location: DenCo Gender: Posts: 9,850 Thanks: 127 Thanked 365 Times in 192 Posts	You have to factor conference into play. There's no guarantee Maryland will look remotely as good after running the ACC. UCLA OTOH looks pretty much like it would take several injuries to not outright win the conference.

01-06-2009, 09:32 PM	#3
Perrin Aybara Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 1999 Location: Alone....so terribly alone... Some... where... out... there... dies Gender: Posts: 12,760 Thanks: 194 Thanked 504 Times in 235 Posts	I'm a Maryland alum and even I don't think Maryland is going to do well this year. These mid-season brackets before conference play are just pointless. Maryland would have to play like their freaking pants are on fire to get in. I mean, our best player is Vasquez. Sad... It's possible...but it's just as likely (perhaps more so) that they simply get blown out of the ACC. Here's hoping their pants catch on fire. -jay

01-06-2009, 10:45 PM	#4
Crazyswordsman This key doesn't work. Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Booyaville (yeah!) Gender: Posts: 10,791 Thanks: 1,019 Thanked 686 Times in 467 Posts	^^UCLA will most likely run the table in the Pac-10, and then will get an early exit from the NCAA tournament when it gets put up against Big East-ACC-Big Ten team No. 5 (out of what looks to be at least 6-7 bids from the latter two conferences and 9-10 for the former). Lurch, basically your post said what we already know: the ACC is one of the best conferences in the country right now and the Pac-10 is one of the worst (the fact that UCLA still has a top ten ranking is beyond me.....their RPI will probably hover around what it is now. When two teams are very close in the amount of wins, you have to factor in things like RPI). -CSM

01-06-2009, 11:33 PM	#5
Lurch1982 Senior Member Join Date: May 2000 Location: DenCo Gender: Posts: 9,850 Thanks: 127 Thanked 365 Times in 192 Posts	I'm with Jay on this one. Basically there's no point in looking at the brackets this early. I MIGHT start looking in mid to late February. Its like looking at Mel Keiper's Big Board in October (or even December) and trying to predict the NFL draft order. I think you're underestimating UCLA. I don't know if they'll be a Final Four team this year, but they certainly can get a 1 or 2 seed and coast to at least the sweet 16, if not the elite 8.

01-07-2009, 05:42 PM	#6
Crazyswordsman This key doesn't work. Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Booyaville (yeah!) Gender: Posts: 10,791 Thanks: 1,019 Thanked 686 Times in 467 Posts	UCLA hasn't proven themselves to me. I don't even think they're the best team in the Pac-10 right now. Cal and Arizona State have impressed me more, despite the fact that both have a few losses, at least they have some quality wins to go with them. UCLA won't get past the Sweet Sixteen, and they'll probably have trouble making it there. Also, it seems to me that when a traditional power loses a game, they fall three spots or so in the rankings. When a non-traditional power proves itself against the big dogs and then loses a game, they drop far more. -CSM

01-08-2009, 11:25 AM	#7
ShyGuy727 Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2000 Location: O-H! I-O! Gender: Posts: 10,135 Thanks: 44 Thanked 77 Times in 54 Posts	lol maryland. Lunardi has seven in from the Big Ten in right now. So refreshing to see.

01-09-2009, 06:21 PM	#9
Lurch1982 Senior Member Join Date: May 2000 Location: DenCo Gender: Posts: 9,850 Thanks: 127 Thanked 365 Times in 192 Posts	Again, looking at brackets in January is like booking the World Series in May. Traditional powers don't drop as far because they're understood to NOT have the dropoff in talent and also tend to schedule harder teams and (as a result of being a power team) have a stronger conference. If some Sun Belt school surges up in the early rankings and then gets handled, they will and should plummet 5 to 10 spots, if not more. They aren't in a deep conference, and they're not exactly deep or proven. Gonzaga took years before they got respect in the polls. It isn't that a smaller school can't get respect, but it takes years of continued success in order to get the benefit of the doubt.