Joe Lunardi's never too early bracketology.

Submitted by robbyt003 on April 17th, 2013 at 12:59 PM

Kentucky, Duke, Arizona, and Michigan St at the 1 line

Michigan and Ohio St - 2 seed

Indiana - 4 seed

Wisconsin - 5 seed

Iowa - 7 seed

Illinois - 11 seed

Okay, so I know we are still 11 months away from Selection Sunday, but I still find them interesting to look at.  



April 17th, 2013 at 2:07 PM ^

The freshmen could come in and be really good, like they were this season.  Add the fact that Spike revealed himself to be a pretty good player, and Michigan might not suffer from the losses of Burke and Hardaway as much as many of us think.

I hope fans truly appreciate what happened this year, though, and don't see next year's team as a disappointment if they don't get to the title game. 

Mr. Yost

April 17th, 2013 at 3:35 PM ^

I don't think you can expect Irvin and Walton to give you more than Burke and Hardaway gave you last year.

That said, the rest of the team will be better. However, we didn't even get a 2 seed THIS year. Do we really expect the team to be BETTER next year?

We were a 4-seed 2 years ago and a 4-seed this year. I think next year's team will be somewhere between the two. I'll say a 4-seed would be an appropriate predicition.


April 17th, 2013 at 1:11 PM ^

I guess Lunardi is assuming McGary, Robinson (maybe Hardaway) are coming back? No was we are a 2 seed if all 4 of them leave.

Ali G Bomaye

April 17th, 2013 at 3:10 PM ^

This bracketology is the equivalent of posting a comment that just says "first."

How can anyone possibly make any reasonable guess at future success when you don't have any idea what half the starting lineup for some teams will be?  When Lunardi made this, he didn't know whether our starting lineup would be Walton/Hardaway/Stauskas/Robinson/McGary, or Walton/Irvin/Stauskas/Morgan/Horford.


April 17th, 2013 at 6:31 PM ^

Lunardi has the best job in the world.  You only work a few months out of the year, nobody pays any attention to what you do until the last month, and you don't even have to be right.  Sign me up.  

Here's my Final Four:  Northwestern, Nebraska, Penn State, Iowa.  As good a guess as anybody's at this point.




April 17th, 2013 at 1:14 PM ^

lol MSU is always at the 1 or 2 line to start the season and then they lose a few games.  Then on Selection Sunday, the analysts predict them to go to the final four and they lose to the first real team they play.  2 years ago it was UCLA, last year it was Louisville, this year it was Duke.


April 17th, 2013 at 1:41 PM ^

Since '99, MSU has been to 6 Final Fours.  Duke, KU, UCONN, and UNC have been to 4 each.  Programs like UCLA, Louisville, Kentucky, Florida, etc. have been less often.

If Izzo is a perpetual disappointment in the tournament, what does that make every other program in the country?


April 17th, 2013 at 7:51 PM ^

have nowhere to go but down.

A few years ago, a reporter for one of the major sportsites--my GoogleFu fails me--put out his list of most overrated and underrated teams by summing the raw number of positions teams moved up or down in the final poll versus the preseason  poll.

The overrated teams consisted of the "Who's Who of College Football" and the underrated teams consisted of a bunch of nobodies.  Hmmmmnnn.

steve sharik

April 17th, 2013 at 1:12 PM ^

...revel in what will be an unbelievable year of Michigan Athletics.  There's a good chance of a B1G title in every major sport for the first time since...maybe ever. (Well, especially hockey since there's never been a B1G, but you know what I mean.)


April 17th, 2013 at 6:38 PM ^

'88 - '89 was pretty sweet:  Football Big Ten and Rose Bowl champs, Basketball National champs.

'92 - '93 was pretty sweet too:  Football undefeated Big Ten and Rose Bowl champs, Basketball National champ runner up.

And '97 - 98:  Football undefeated Big Ten, Rose Bowl, and National champs, Hockey National champs.



April 17th, 2013 at 1:15 PM ^

Yeah, consider me surprised that Lunardi has us so high, seeing as there is a very good chance we lose all four starters. 

Or maybe he is just very bullish on Walton and Irvin. 


April 17th, 2013 at 1:19 PM ^

McGary already said that he was coming back for sure and I would guess that Glenn is coming back because he went to the Spring game.  Usually guys who are leaving don't participate in university events like that and I also believe that McGary is roomates with GR3.

Mr. Rager

April 17th, 2013 at 1:29 PM ^

If GR3 and McGary come back, I would be disappointed with anything worse than a 2-seed caliber team next year.  Key words being "2-seed caliber", as we looked more like the former #1 overall team than the 4-seed designation we received in the tournament this year.

Just imagine (minutes in parens):

PG: Walton (25), Spike (15)

SG: Stauskas (30), Caris (10)

SF: Irvin (35), Caris (5)

PF: GR3 (35), Morgan (5)

C: McGary (30), Morgan (5), Horford (5)

Spikes minutes double.  GR3 / Stauskas stay the same.  McGary sees a bump from 20 to more like his tournament average.   Caris gets about 5 more per game.  

Bursley Blue

April 17th, 2013 at 1:34 PM ^

Is anyone else worried Morgan will leave if McGary comes back? Using logic and some whispers I've heard, I think he takes advantage of the graduate transfer loophole to go somewhere with more playing time.

I hope not, but would understand and respect his decision. He has given a lot to this university and handled his benching/demotion with nothing but class.


April 17th, 2013 at 1:37 PM ^

True but in the last three years MSU has been severly overrated either at the start of the season in 2010-11 when they were ranked # 2, or last year and this year when national analysts claimed they were going to the final 4 and lost in the sweet 16.  I agree what Izzo did between 1999-2010 was impressive though.  We'll see if he can get them back on track this year.


April 17th, 2013 at 1:41 PM ^

We had other players besides him.  In the NCAA tournament, I believe there were only 2 where he gave us over 20 points.  No player is greater than the program and freshmen have performed very well under Beilein.  We have 2 4 stars and a 5 star coming in.


April 17th, 2013 at 1:44 PM ^

I'm talking about since 2010.  I agree wholeheartedly that he was amazing in the last decade but his teams have been consistently overrated for the last 3 years and I'm not being a biased homer sayng that.  The results speak for themselves.


April 17th, 2013 at 2:25 PM ^

They've been to the Sweet 16 the last two seasons.  It took us nearly 20 years to get back to that point in the tournament.  If that is a "disappointment", your standards are totally out of touch with reality.

The only other programs to match or better MSU in the tourney each of the past two years are OSU, Florida, Louisville, Syracuse, Marquette, Indiana, and Kansas.  A criticism that amounts to "The media thought they were a top-5 team but really they were only a top 10-15 team, LOL!" isn't much of a criticism at all.


April 17th, 2013 at 3:48 PM ^

The big ten was murderous this year.  It should be easy enough to get us a 2 seed with all of the players gone and Irvin could be better than Hardaway.  Hardaway didn't really do much this year and Irvin was Indiana's mr. basketball.