Bracket Math brought to you by Joe Lunardi
- Thread starter lurkeraspect84
- Start date
@fluoxetine could take Lunardi.
I always think it's funny how Lunardi likes to boast something like, "I correctly picked 66 of the 68 teams from last year's tournament." There are 32 automatic qualifiers. You really only have to pick 36 at-large bids. And probably 25-30 of those teams are pretty obvious. So, when I see 66 out of 68, my mind is more or less thinking, "Oh, so you got 4 of the final 6 teams right."
As far as his current list, I take it he's really only factoring in the results that have already occurred. Kentucky, for example, is projected as a 5 seed. I see them as a 2 seed (3 seed at worse), but I recognize that their only top 100 win thus far was against UNC.
Houston has lost Marcus Sasser and Tramon Mark to season-ending injuries. Colossal losses. He currently has them as a 3 seed, which is fine, based on merit. But, I think they'll struggle to standout as a top 10-15 team with a very thin guard lineup. A 5 or 6 seed would be more realistic, IMO.
The one team that I think he has wrong, even off of current results, is Colorado State. They're 10-0, including 3 top 50 wins against Saint Mary's, Creighton, and Mississippi State. 27th on the S-Curve is way too low. If this is based on merit, they absolutely deserve to be in the top 20... Lunardi is okay. But, there are better bracketologists. He just happens to have the biggest platform. I would gladly take his position for less than half of what he makes.
As far as his current list, I take it he's really only factoring in the results that have already occurred. Kentucky, for example, is projected as a 5 seed. I see them as a 2 seed (3 seed at worse), but I recognize that their only top 100 win thus far was against UNC.
Houston has lost Marcus Sasser and Tramon Mark to season-ending injuries. Colossal losses. He currently has them as a 3 seed, which is fine, based on merit. But, I think they'll struggle to standout as a top 10-15 team with a very thin guard lineup. A 5 or 6 seed would be more realistic, IMO.
The one team that I think he has wrong, even off of current results, is Colorado State. They're 10-0, including 3 top 50 wins against Saint Mary's, Creighton, and Mississippi State. 27th on the S-Curve is way too low. If this is based on merit, they absolutely deserve to be in the top 20... Lunardi is okay. But, there are better bracketologists. He just happens to have the biggest platform. I would gladly take his position for less than half of what he makes.
Wow. I just noticed the WCC has as many teams in his projected bracket as the ACC. Which is especially sad for the ACC, because the # of schools in the ACC is 50% more than the WCC. The top 4 schools in those respective conferences are basically mirrors of each other in the rankings. Historically great season for the WCC.
Also, the WCC has one more team in the projected field than the Pac-12. But, Pac-12 does have three top 10 teams, so a little can be forgiven there - and their conference is a bit smaller than the ACC.
WCC
4. Gonzaga
34. BYU
37. San Franciso
42. Saint Mary's
ACC
3. Duke
32. North Carolina
39. Virginia Tech
40. Wake Forest
Pac-12
6. Arizona
7. UCLA
9. USC
Also, the WCC has one more team in the projected field than the Pac-12. But, Pac-12 does have three top 10 teams, so a little can be forgiven there - and their conference is a bit smaller than the ACC.
WCC
4. Gonzaga
34. BYU
37. San Franciso
42. Saint Mary's
ACC
3. Duke
32. North Carolina
39. Virginia Tech
40. Wake Forest
Pac-12
6. Arizona
7. UCLA
9. USC
The story goes beyond the #'s for how bad it really is for the ACC.
Indirectly, this opens it up for other leagues to pull in more teams than usual.
The ACC Cant even play games right now. FSU has played 3 games in the entire month of December. At this point, this season is worse than last.
Duke has only played 4 games in December. It would be 5 if Wednesday’s game wasn’t being postponed.
It's rough. Hate recording games only to see some other sport being featured. The thought, "Oh, this was canceled" immediately sets in.
I watched the entire Northern Iowa-Liberty game last week. I usually like to see at least one top 50 team, but I'm willing to lower my standards if there aren't many options available.
I thought I saw CDC adjusted some recommendations it's past time for sports to do the same. I've heard a few changes in the COVID rules have happened with NBA and NFL, and some of the college leagues are addressing it, might be time to do more.
Hopefully the powers that be are sports fans.
I can handle inflation if my team is winning.
True. But to be fair, 5 is a lot more than 3. 66% more. I feel like FSU has basically started our season over. IF we get to play on Saturday, it will be our first game in 17 days.
With our games against Clemson and Notre Dame being postponed. If we play our next game which is Georgia Tech on January 4th, it will be our first game in 13 days.
Yes. We are saying the same thing. The ACC can barely get games in right now.
