2023 Bracketology

[kidA]

Hi everybody. So there’s a new Bracketology for next season to go along with the way too early top 25 on ESPN.com. It’s from two days ago, so presumably it contemplates Grandison being on our roster, but then again news of his joining us is nowhere to be found on espn.com, where he is still listed as uncommitted on the transfer portal list.

Anyway, genius Joe Lunardi has us as the number three seed in the south, behind Kentucky and Kansas at one and two, respectively. He has us opening against Pitino, and our second round game against Grandison‘s former team, coincidentally enough.

Like everything else discussed at this point in “the season,“ it is wildly speculative. I would prefer not to be in the same quarter as Kentucky and the defending champ, wildly speculative though the prediction is. But wild speculation is what fuels this board (and I say that with love), so please discuss.

[rsvman]

Worthless. Why can't Lumardi tell us what our seed will be in 2027? That's what I really want to know.

[Indoor66]

Hi everybody. So there’s a new Bracketology for next season to go along with the way too early top 25 on ESPN.com. It’s from two days ago, so presumably it contemplates Grandison being on our roster, but then again news of his joining us is nowhere to be found on espn.com, where he is still listed as uncommitted on the transfer portal list.

Anyway, genius Joe Lunardi has us as the number three seed in the south, behind Kentucky and Kansas at one and two, respectively. He has us opening against Pitino, and our second round game against Grandison‘s former team, coincidentally enough.

Like everything else discussed at this point in “the season,“ it is wildly speculative. I would prefer not to be in the same quarter as Kentucky and the defending champ, wildly speculative though the prediction is. But wild speculation is what fuels this board (and I say that with love), so please discuss.

What does the Bracketology look like for the 2025 Tournament? It just as relevant. 🙄

[Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15]

Must... not... go... on...Lunardi rant...

[OldPhiKap]

Hi everybody. So there’s a new Bracketology for next season to go along with the way too early top 25 on ESPN.com. It’s from two days ago, so presumably it contemplates Grandison being on our roster, but then again news of his joining us is nowhere to be found on espn.com, where he is still listed as uncommitted on the transfer portal list.

Anyway, genius Joe Lunardi has us as the number three seed in the south, behind Kentucky and Kansas at one and two, respectively. He has us opening against Pitino, and our second round game against Grandison‘s former team, coincidentally enough.

Like everything else discussed at this point in “the season,“ it is wildly speculative. I would prefer not to be in the same quarter as Kentucky and the defending champ, wildly speculative though the prediction is. But wild speculation is what fuels this board (and I say that with love), so please discuss.

Put me down for winning it all. And, complaining about whatever seed/region we draw. It’s tradition.

What are we early-projected in the conference, second behind the cheats?

[bundabergdevil]

Must... not... go... on...Lunardi rant...

Dude’s like Nate Silver on election night with that mess.

[Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15]

Dude’s like Nate Silver on election night with that mess.

*Bites his tongue*

[bundabergdevil]

*Bites his tongue*

I heard he does the same thing with mid-sized cities for a travel website and Asheville was a 15 seed.

[Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15]

I heard he does the same thing with mid-sized cities for a travel website and Asheville was a 15 seed.

Hahaha... Thanks.

No, I wish Asheville were a 15 seed. We are suffering from too much awesomeness these days.

[Daddylawman]

Hahaha... Thanks.

No, I wish Asheville were a 15 seed. We are suffering from too much awesomeness these days.

Because, beer is awesome

[CameronBornAndBred]

HAHAHAHAHAHA


And that's the most honest comment I can make on June 15th.

[TywinBlue]

Dude’s like Nate Silver on election night with that mess.

Lunardi has played his college basketball scam for decades now- totally worthless.

Gary Parrish at CBS Sports actually knows what he's talking about.

[Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15]

Lunardi has played his college basketball scam for decades now- totally worthless.

Gary Parrish at CBS Sports actually knows what he's talking about.

Any anti-Lunardi post will get shameless sporks from me.

[rsvman]

Do people hate Lunardi because he's ugly, or because he's annoying? Or is it because he is making a good living doing something that any of us could easily do? Maybe deep down we are just jealous that he managed to corner the market at the right time? Or is it because he is now stretching the gig far beyond it's limits?
By the time the tournament comes around he is generally pretty accurate, but gets no credit because it gets pretty simple the closer it gets to the actual tip-off.
Don't get me wrong, I don't like him either, although I don't feel the intense dislike that some people on this forum apparently do.

[AGDukesky]

Do people hate Lunardi because he's ugly, or because he's annoying? Or is it because he is making a good living doing something that any of us could easily do? Maybe deep down we are just jealous that he managed to corner the market at the right time? Or is it because he is now stretching the gig far beyond it's limits?
By the time the tournament comes around he is generally pretty accurate, but gets no credit because it gets pretty simple the closer it gets to the actual tip-off.
Don't get me wrong, I don't like him either, although I don't feel the intense dislike that some people on this forum apparently do.

I’m with you. My guess is the hate stems more from how ESPN treats him like an expert miracle worker than anything Joe actually does. It’s a trend especially in sports fandom to hate a player for being overrated and not because the player is really unlikeable.

[CDu]

Do people hate Lunardi because he's ugly, or because he's annoying? Or is it because he is making a good living doing something that any of us could easily do? Maybe deep down we are just jealous that he managed to corner the market at the right time? Or is it because he is now stretching the gig far beyond it's limits?
By the time the tournament comes around he is generally pretty accurate, but gets no credit because it gets pretty simple the closer it gets to the actual tip-off.
Don't get me wrong, I don't like him either, although I don't feel the intense dislike that some people on this forum apparently do.

I think the bolded part is what folks don't like. The guy was very clever in marketing himself in the early days. What he did wasn't terribly impressive, but few people were doing it at the time and so he found a niche. And I suspect that annoys folks because he's getting famous and paid for doing something that isn't very hard.

What he ISN'T good at is analyzing actual basketball. And early on, he was adamant that all he was doing was grading the resumes (i.e., what the teams had done) and NOT projecting.

But ESPN probably pushes him to do these year-round in order to make whatever they pay him worthwhile to them. And so he is now in the business of projecting seeds during the offseason, something he is in no way qualified to do. And that only further pisses folks off, because now he's doing bad projections in addition to his not-very-impressive skill.

[Kedsy]

Do people hate Lunardi because he's ugly, or because he's annoying? Or is it because he is making a good living doing something that any of us could easily do? Maybe deep down we are just jealous that he managed to corner the market at the right time? Or is it because he is now stretching the gig far beyond it's limits?
By the time the tournament comes around he is generally pretty accurate, but gets no credit because it gets pretty simple the closer it gets to the actual tip-off.
Don't get me wrong, I don't like him either, although I don't feel the intense dislike that some people on this forum apparently do.

Some of you have heard this story, but from 1990 to 2019 I ran a pre-tournament basketball pool, in which participants in mid-February had to pick what teams would make the tournament (as well as who would make the Elite Eight, Final Four, and who would be the champion). I'm from Philadelphia, and in the mid-90s, through a friend of a friend, Joe Lunardi played in my pool for a couple years. At the time, he was a communications director in the St. Joseph's athletic department. He also was one of the guys who put out the Blue Ribbon College Basketball Yearbook, which was a fabulous publication that I used to purchase every year. I spoke to Joe several times on the phone. I saw him once or twice at Big Five doubleheaders. He told me he thought my contest was the best/most fun pool he'd ever played. (Though he never did particularly well in the contest.)

Whether or not he already had the idea or if he got it from my pool, a couple of years later he stopped playing in my pool, pitched the idea to ESPN and became their bracketology expert. I admit I was a little bit jealous, but I said then and still say now: more power to him for finding a way to get paid for something he loves. Though he did stop taking my calls at that point.

[Travis]

Some of you have heard this story, but from 1990 to 2019 I ran a pre-tournament basketball pool, in which participants in mid-February had to pick what teams would make the tournament (as well as who would make the Elite Eight, Final Four, and who would be the champion). I'm from Philadelphia, and in the mid-90s, through a friend of a friend, Joe Lunardi played in my pool for a couple years. At the time, he was a communications director in the St. Joseph's athletic department. He also was one of the guys who put out the Blue Ribbon College Basketball Yearbook, which was a fabulous publication that I used to purchase every year. I spoke to Joe several times on the phone. I saw him once or twice at Big Five doubleheaders. He told me he thought my contest was the best/most fun pool he'd ever played. (Though he never did particularly well in the contest.)

Whether or not he already had the idea or if he got it from my pool, a couple of years later he stopped playing in my pool, pitched the idea to ESPN and became their bracketology expert. I admit I was a little bit jealous, but I said then and still say now: more power to him for finding a way to get paid for something he loves. Though he did stop taking my calls at that point.

Kedsy

I have always profited from and enjoyed your posts. For this one, I am not sure whether to think you are even more awesome or to blame you for Lunardi’s insufferable prognostication.

Guess I will go with the former.
Travis

[Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15]

Do people hate Lunardi because he's ugly, or because he's annoying? Or is it because he is making a good living doing something that any of us could easily do? Maybe deep down we are just jealous that he managed to corner the market at the right time? Or is it because he is now stretching the gig far beyond it's limits?
By the time the tournament comes around he is generally pretty accurate, but gets no credit because it gets pretty simple the closer it gets to the actual tip-off.
Don't get me wrong, I don't like him either, although I don't feel the intense dislike that some people on this forum apparently do.

*Takes a deep breath*

So, it's not because he's ugly or annoying.

Part of it is that 98% what he does is inherently impossible to disprove. As in "it's December 20th, and if the tournament started today, this is what the seeds would look like." Well, sure, but it doesn't.

The 2% that is actually verifiable - predicting the tournament bracket the day of - is just not difficult. By Selection Sunday, I'd eager that most regular posters on DBR could get as close to "accurate" as Lunardi does. Things just don't vary that much.

So, yes, I feel like he is doing something for money that I could do as "well" as he does.

A minor nitpick I have with him, is his use of "lock" as a term with any meaning prior to March (admittedly, this is a personal pedantic issue). Absolutely nothing in January is a lock - not #1 seeds, not tournament berths - nothing. Sure, it can be likely that undefeated Gonzaga isn't going to drop eight in a row, but if you call them a "lock" for the one seed, it's just not true.

My biggest problem is that his predictions make fan based FREAK OUT. When Lunardi says that three teams are "locks" for one seeds with four weeks left (and conference tournaments) the Henny Pennys come running. Suddenly, Duke is vying for the LAST AVAILABLE ONE SEED. It's completely absurd. Same with seeding, same with conference berths.

Point being, people react as though Lunardi is doing anything of significance that has consequences to our teams. If Duke is a three seed according to Lunardi, fans lose their minds insisting we deserve better and won't be able to climb to a two seed.

If he operated in a vacuum and was just posting his opinions - who cares. But his updates are mentioned on Sports center, mentioned during game broadcasts, and all over the internet.

I guess at the end of the day, my issue isn't as much with Lunardi as the number of conversations, posts, game breaks that start with "Lunardi's latest bracket has..."

Clearly, I failed in my attempt to NOT go on my rant. It's not about Lunardi, it's the way everyone treats him like an oracle or of someone with inside knowledge.

I will rejoice when he retires this schtick, but I know others will take his place.

Now I need a scotch.

[brevity]

Some of you have heard this story, but from 1990 to 2019 I ran a pre-tournament basketball pool, in which participants in mid-February had to pick what teams would make the tournament (as well as who would make the Elite Eight, Final Four, and who would be the champion). I'm from Philadelphia, and in the mid-90s, through a friend of a friend, Joe Lunardi played in my pool for a couple years. At the time, he was a communications director in the St. Joseph's athletic department. He also was one of the guys who put out the Blue Ribbon College Basketball Yearbook, which was a fabulous publication that I used to purchase every year. I spoke to Joe several times on the phone. I saw him once or twice at Big Five doubleheaders. He told me he thought my contest was the best/most fun pool he'd ever played. (Though he never did particularly well in the contest.)

Whether or not he already had the idea or if he got it from my pool, a couple of years later he stopped playing in my pool, pitched the idea to ESPN and became their bracketology expert. I admit I was a little bit jealous, but I said then and still say now: more power to him for finding a way to get paid for something he loves. Though he did stop taking my calls at that point.

Amazing story. You may have helped give him the idea of Bracketology, but the choice to color his hair/toupee with shoe polish was all Lunardi.

lunardilego.jpg

Lunardi doesn't bother me as much as ESPN's use of him. He's not worth half a screen during a live basketball game; save him for a studio show during halftime or between games. Even worse is their treatment of Bracketology as news, which it is not. Keep it off the Bottom Line.