OT: ESPN U The Experts Mock Bracket
I have been watching this for this last hour. I have actually been pleasantly surprised with the quality of the analysis that has been given so far. Better than any other show providing analysis thus far this year .Outside of Joe Lunardi there are some very knowledgeable people giving their picks. It is a sort of panel discussion/ group bracket format. It ends in one hour if anyone wants to catch the Final Four picks.
Anyone else been watching this?
March 12th, 2012 at 10:59 PM ^
Haven't been watching. What did they say about us?
March 12th, 2012 at 11:10 PM ^
The majority say we will make it to the Sweet 16 and lose to UNC. One guy said we would beat UNC, a couplethought we would lose to either Ohio or Temple/Cal. They are about to talk more in depth about the match up of UNC v U of M after this commercial.
EDIT: One guy said we COULD beat UNC/ we have a good chance. Still put his money on UNC though.
March 13th, 2012 at 12:31 AM ^
They didn't pick us to win the whole thing? What a bunch of idiots.
i can't give any anyone too much shit, because we are the type of team who could catch fire and win the whole thing, or have a hirrble shooting night and lose in the first (second? bah!) round.
March 12th, 2012 at 11:04 PM ^
Not snarky or critical, but a sincere question - you said "outside of Joe Lunardi". Do you mean that Lunardi has not seemed knowledgeable, or that you were impressed that people besides him seemed knowledgeable? Either is a fair answer, but I am curious as to what you meant. I have not seen the show, so I have no idea.
EDIT: question was for OP, not for Denardogasm, who posted while I was writing mine
March 12th, 2012 at 11:08 PM ^
The information Lunardi has been providing has been fine. He clearly doesnt have the same basketball IQ as these other guys, but he has been okay. I meant that a lot of people hate Lunardi and dont put stock in his opinions, I was saying there are other people who are providing great info and whos opinions may warrant more respect.
March 12th, 2012 at 11:22 PM ^
I know that Lunardi is a wizard in terms of bracketology. Guess that doesn't necessarily translate into the game though. He might be more of a statistician than a basketball guy. Sounds like a good show. Looking forward to hearing more about what the smart guys think about a UM-UNC matchup.
To me, it seems like our worst nightmare. They are real tall and real deep. Interesting to hear what the pros have to say about it. Maybe they get bamboozled by our unconventional sets or we outshoot them or something.
Still, they have to get by Creighton first, as I recall. Not a given by any stretch.
You mean: "They have to get past Lamarr first"
Lunardi is actually pretty medicore at bracketology: http://bracketproject.50webs.com/matrix.htm
Middle-end of the pack, and that's how he fares most years. He's not awful, but the worldwide leader should be doing better. Also, isn't this basically all he does? You think he would do better than that.
Bottom line, Lunardi is not a wizard, and there are much better places to go for projections.
He got 67 of 68 teams correctly in or out this year.
March 13th, 2012 at 11:41 AM ^
He got 61 teams within 1 seed; the most anybody got was 63. And he certainly wasn't middle-end of the pack. He was well above the average.
I didn't realize this hadn't already been posted on the thread. If you want to see how Lunardi and others have done through the years, it's here:
http://bracketproject.50webs.com/rankings.html
On average he's been a bit worse than the average guy with a bracket blog.
Lobofan2003 kicked ass once again and probably moved to the top of this list. If ESPN replaces Lunardi with him I can promise I'll watch their bracket show next year.
67 of 68 was average among the brackets submitted at Bracket Project. Nobody did worse than 65 and there were only a couple of those.
To give Lunardi credit, it looks like he finished in the top half this year, for only the second time in his career, and he finished ahead of the other big media guys like Palm. Brad Evans beat him again, though, as he has now 4 years out of 5.
March 12th, 2012 at 11:19 PM ^
Anyone but Doug Gottlieb. The guy for some reason hates Michigan and has picked against them the past two seasons in the tournament
Also did anyone see the BPI ratings ? According the BPI Michigan would be a 8 seed and Memphis a 4 seed !!!
March 12th, 2012 at 11:26 PM ^
Ignoring Michigan, does anybody else feel like Memphis has a legit shot at upsetting Michigan State in Round 2 (I'm not calling it Round 3). Athletic, talented team that matches up well with Sparty and has been playing well as of late. It's hard to pick against Izzo in the tournament, but man, that screams upset to me.
Or, alternately, Memphis could lose to St. Louis.
March 12th, 2012 at 11:32 PM ^
March 13th, 2012 at 11:20 AM ^
Legit shot? Yeah, I can buy that. The problem is that St. Louis is pretty good, too, and 8/9 games are a crapshoot. I wouldn't be overly surprised if it happened, but I would never pick an 8/9 seed to upset a 1 seed. Too much can go wrong in picking that.
March 13th, 2012 at 12:54 PM ^
That first round game will be interesting -- the team with a great coach versus a team with great talent. As Xs and Os coaches go, it seems like Pastner is a great recruiter.
March 12th, 2012 at 11:29 PM ^
If you go to ESPN.com, they have a different writer break down each bracket. The writer for the Midwest bracket, Jason King, managed to to so without a single mention of Michigan.
If I was unclear with that last sentence, let me be more clear. The ESPN Midwest bracketologist described the whole bracket without once mentioning UM.
Four seed is one thing, considering that the committee's "full" listing had us at 13, edged by Georgetown, in what I would call a bit of a personal choice. This guy apparently does not even consider the fact that Michigan can win one game, let alone win two games and give the third team a tough day.
At the risk of being a homer, shouldn't we be mentioned in the discussion? AP Top Ten a day ago ? ? ?
March 12th, 2012 at 11:25 PM ^
are the Experts mocking the most?
March 12th, 2012 at 11:42 PM ^
You dont really see each persons individual bracket. They discuss each matchup and then vote and the majority goes on. Cool way to do things, but it inevitably ended up with all four #1 seeds in the Final Four. The commentary and analysis on each matchup has been much more interesting than the actual consnsus bracket they have put together. I would be interested in seeing each persons individual bracket though.
March 12th, 2012 at 11:50 PM ^
I think Picktown is suggesting that you add an apostrophe to your title.
March 12th, 2012 at 11:55 PM ^
It is the title of the show. The show has no apostrophe, so I didn't use one either.
March 13th, 2012 at 12:10 AM ^
I don't get ESPNU, so I guess I'll never know, but the show sounds Monty Pythonesque.
March 13th, 2012 at 12:04 AM ^
They had each guy do an individual Sweet 16 and beyond bracket on their own earlier in the show.
One guy had Florida in the Final 4.
A couple of Vanderbilts.
Mostly chalky outside of an occasional FSU beating OSU, or Louisville or Mizzou beating Michigan State, or Baylor beating Duke.
March 12th, 2012 at 11:43 PM ^
It has been really good....I could make an argument that Miles Simon seems out of place....but listen to Welsh and Guadio has been real nice. Better than Vitale or Phelps.
March 13th, 2012 at 12:03 AM ^
Woah, nothing is better than Vitale baby!!
March 13th, 2012 at 12:01 AM ^
The show is being replayed all over again right now. If you plan on being up late I would suggest watching it. I however, will be catching some z's.
I've got Lehigh going all the way. Hop on the bandwagon, fellas.
going all the way. My final four teams are WKU, Vermont and LIU Brooklyn and UNC-Asheville! I'm going to win the big money!!!!!!