M-Dog

March 13th, 2016 at 1:08 PM ^

Of course.  If you were the network, you would do the same thing.  

Which Bachelorette will get the ring and which one will go home crying in the limo?  It makes great TV.  Their job is ultimately TV, not basketball.

 

bronxblue

March 13th, 2016 at 1:25 PM ^

Palm seems even higher on UM than most, so I'm wondering what might be up there.  But Lunardi does this every year; I'm not sour on him for this year, only that I've watched enough college basketball and selection committees that this trend happens more often than not.  He's paid to be on TV as much as make picks, and so I'm not surprised he plays up the drama.  But its stuff like this that makes it hard to take anything he says with a great deal of faith.

King Douche Ornery

March 13th, 2016 at 10:55 AM ^

All the college graduates here who hate everybody in the media, call them childish names, yet HINGE ON THEIR EVERY WORD.

 

MFanWM

March 13th, 2016 at 11:03 AM ^

In my opinion it is pretty spot on. Michigan has zero inside presence and too often seems completely absent of any coherent game plan. Irvin and Walton more often than not have down games which should be the two key leaders with Levert out. Recruiting some bigs who actually understand how to play defense, are aggressive, athletic and don't play like a powder puff football team would be greatly appreciated.



Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad

PurpleStuff

March 13th, 2016 at 11:10 AM ^

Somehow they managed to have a better conference record, more elite wins, and fewer bad losses than just about every other team on the bubble.

I get that you like bitching and moaning about our basketball team (as so many seem to nowadays), but your feelingsball hot take is completely irrelevant to this conversation.

Quailman

March 13th, 2016 at 1:15 PM ^

Naw, the committe has made its mind up on UM. Purdue winning doesnt change it. Only matters if they have UM as one of the last ones in and Memphis steals a spot.

That said, root for Purdue bc eff MSU.

DrAwkward

March 13th, 2016 at 11:22 AM ^

As several posters have noted, getting all but two teams right is not that impressive. Almost all bracketologists get to that point by the last day.

Here is a site that evaluates bracketologists based more on seeding. Lunardi's is fairly good, but far from the genius prognosticator that ESPN makes him out to be.

http://bracketmatrix.com/rankings.html

The same people have put together a chart of all of the bracketologists. Unfortunately, it has not been updated since yeaterday. Most people have M as an 11 seed.

http://bracketmatrix.com/

Wolvie3758

March 13th, 2016 at 11:26 AM ^

for UConn over Memphis...a Memphis win could very well knock Michigan out (assuming they are one of the last teams in

umchicago

March 13th, 2016 at 11:44 AM ^

didn't he still have vandy and monmouth ahead of UM yesterday?  then UM gets blown out by purdue.  now he moves UM past those two teams.  makes no sense.  like people have pointed out, i don't think he really knows what he is doing but gets inside info from people on the panel.

mackbru

March 13th, 2016 at 11:47 AM ^

Lunardi moves teams in and out to keep people interested and clicking. Then, at the very end, he predicts which teams will actually get in. It's a racket.



Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad

Wolvie3758

March 13th, 2016 at 12:14 PM ^

Jay Bilas mouth SHUT...GOD he is annoying and a blowhard...He talks as if HIS Opinion is the final word on any topic....I cannot stand listening to him ...and per usual he never misses a opportunity to talk negative about the BIg Ten....can we just call him Jay Bias

Wolvie3758

March 13th, 2016 at 12:34 PM ^

all of a sudden everyone who had us out now says were in INCLUDING Bilas...just moments ago ALL the ESPN game day folks all said were In....what a rollercoaster

In reply to by Wolvie3758

M-Dog

March 13th, 2016 at 1:17 PM ^

Wow.  Yesterday on College Game Day they all had us out.  It was not even close.  They showed a list of 8 bubble candidates and essentially had us as 7th.  

Not much has really happened since then that would propel us upward.  If anything, we should have fallen even further back after the Purdue beat down.

They just felt like changing their minds.

Great work if you can get it.

Wolvie3758

March 13th, 2016 at 1:22 PM ^

They received inside info so the reversal is to save face...what else can it be? Like you said they ALL said we were ut and not even close and then less than 24 hrs later it all changed? shows you they are just saving face

 

 

M-Dog

March 13th, 2016 at 1:45 PM ^

It makes them look like fools because they were so damn cocksure that Michigan had no chance to get in.  Now they are recanting.

If you don't really know then don't strut around on National TV like you've just proven the existence of God.  You have no idea what you are talking about.

I'm talking to you Jay Bil-ass.

 

M-Dog

March 13th, 2016 at 1:20 PM ^

Lunardi has the best job in the world.  He only does it for 3 months, and nobody even pays any attention to it until the last 2 weeks.  

And then after all of that, he does not even have to be right.

At 6:00 PM EST today, he is essentially done working for the year.

All hail Lunardi.

 

 

smwilliams

March 13th, 2016 at 1:51 PM ^

Since 2011 (when the First Four thing began), here's the power conference teams with an RPI between 50-60 and 4 wins versus the Top 50 in RPI (let alone 3 in the Top 25) that missed the tournament.

...

Yep, that's right zero. Here's the list.

2011 Michigan: 20-13 (6-9 versus Top 50) - #8 Seed

2012 Texas: 20-13 (4-11 versus Top 50) - #11 Seed

2012 WVU: 19-13 (4-8 versus Top 50) - #10 Seed

2013 Cincinnati: 22-11 (5-9 versus Top 50) - #10 Seed

2013 Villanova: 19-13 (5-8 versus Top 50) - #9 Seed

2013 Cal: 20-11 (5-5 versus Top 50) - #12 Seed

2014 Kansas St.: 20-12 (7-8 versus Top 50) - #9 Seed

2014 Iowa: 19-12 (5-9 versus Top 50) - #11 Play In Game

2015 Purdue: 21-12 (4-6 versus Top 50) - #9 Seed

2015 Indiana: 20-13 (4-9 versus Top 50) - #10 Seed

And if you go back another 5 years, I still couldn't find an example of a team with an RPI in our range and with 4 really good wins that missed the tournament.

That 2012 Texas team might be the best comparison. We're at 21-12 (instead of 20-13), but they also went 4-11 versus the Top 100, but lost 2 games to "bad" teams. Their RPI was 50 instead of 59.

If Monmouth or Temple or San Diego State get in ahead of Michigan, it's a travesty and a major outlier in terms of the committee's history.