I'm pretty sure he's wrong quite a bit when it comes to teams seeds.
He may get 80%/85% of the teams correct but not their seeding.
Latest Bracketology
- Thread starter goody2012
- Start date
I'm pretty sure he's wrong quite a bit when it comes to teams seeds.
He may get 80%/85% of the teams correct but not their seeding.
Lunardi is Putting way too much weight into Iowa States Net and conference record. FWIW he's had Iowa State significantly lower than Palm all season. As it sits today Iowa State is absolutely in as an 8 or 9 seed.
Lunardi has not updated his bracket in over 48 hours. That Bracketology was before ISU's win at TCU and UNC's loss last night. ISU should be moving up on his new one, whenever it comes out.
If Iowa St only gets 2 more wins going into the last Saturday against Baylor, since that game is the last of the day, we may actually have to hope for the scenario that pushes Iowa St down to an 8 seed, (assuming a loss to Baylor) so they can get the single Wednesday game in Kansas City. Otherwise, they're likely playing Tech or Baylor first round.
I get that he has the biggest platform but we gotta stop viewing Lunardi as the Dalai Lama of Bracketology. The bracket matrix grades bracketologist every year and he is always middle to bottom of the pack when it's comes to seeding correctly.
Bracket matrix has Iowa as an 8 seed (#30) and Iowa State as a 9 seed (#34). I would swap those around but close enough.
He was one of, if not the first one doing it, and he has the biggest bullhorn with ESPN throwing out their "Joey Brackets" stuff on every broadcast, but he's remarkably average at his job
Yep. The Power of the ESPN. The average sports fan thinks he is the oracle of brackets, but he has sucked for many years. But credit to him that he was one of the first.
Bracket Matrix is simply a great site and we are still hanging strong. Cannot let anymore crap home losses like TCU or KState though.
He gets way more than 80 or 85% of the teams right. 85% right would be missing on 10 teams, which is ridiculous. If you are just talking at large teams, that would mean missing on 6. I'm not saying he is one of the best bracketologists, but nobody is as bad as you say he is.
Maybe I'm wrong but is 80-85% really that good? Getting 50% is automatic with roughly that many automatic bids and of the at large bids I feel like at least half of those are obvious (ex- if Kansas didn't win the Big 12 tournament they are obviously in). If you guessed on the bubble teams it's not like there are that many to choose from so even then you're going to get a good chunk of those right. Maybe I don't know what the hell I'm talking about though?
Gets way too influenced by the momentum of the season over time, IMO, which gives him a recency bias.
Looking at the 2021 NCAA brackets it sure looks like we're in with our record even as it stands today. I was shocked to see how many of the at-large bids had crap records last year. I know it was a different year due to Covid, so I pulled up the 2019 bracket as well. Several 19-win teams made it in.
2021:
2019:
2021:
2019:
Lunardi still has UNC in. On his tweet he’s getting attacked for having them in. As he should be.
No, 80-85% is absolutely terrible, no matter if you are including auto-bids or not. My point is that Lunardi is far, far better than 80-85% and still not one of the best.
Is it easy to see conference record broken out?
This is what the ESPN/media talking heads will latch on to. They’ll find some low mid major with a great conference record and show how that team got left out but ISU with a 6-12 record got in.
It’s going to be super interesting to see them dance around the Quad 1 wins though.
