OT: ESPN U The Experts Mock Bracket

Submitted by Rather be on BA on March 12th, 2012 at 10:51 PM

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?


Rather be on BA

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 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

Rather be on BA

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.


March 13th, 2012 at 2:24 AM ^

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.


March 13th, 2012 at 9:28 AM ^

Yea but he only really needs to figure out the bubble teams so really he's like 3 out of 4. A real measure is his ability to predict the correct seedings. If he predicted a team to be a 6 seed but they ended up being an 8 seed the team is still in but his prediction wasn't very accurate.


March 13th, 2012 at 2:29 PM ^

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:


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.


March 13th, 2012 at 9:48 AM ^

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 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 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 13th, 2012 at 2:03 AM ^

With the way Novak an Hardaway are playing rit now, if any team take out Burke Michigan will lose. I can see why people don't count us in because we live or die by the 3s. I think you all are really positive about this year's team but after watching all their game I feel they're not a top 16 team. Michigan cannot rebound well against big men so we have to out score them by 3s. So it's really hard to predict Michigan's tourny run, if theyre in a shooting slump, OHIO will beat Michigan, and if Michigan just draining 3and3 then I can see Michigan beat anyone.


March 13th, 2012 at 9:02 AM ^

VCU, Butler, and George Mason probably weren't Top 16 teams either. That's what's great (or horrible, depending on your POV) about the Tourney, anyone can get hot and make a Final Four run. As for living and dying by the 3, I think you're putting way too much emphasis on these last 2 outings. Minny was an off-game, and TSIO committed to shutting down Burke. tOU and Temple don't have Aaron Craft on their roster, or a Sullinger type guy. And, in that TSIO game, they had quite a lot of luck with them too. Everything was falling for them, which had them build up a small lead, which forced us into panic mode since we weren't finishing on O, which lead to a lot of 3's to make up the difference.

Saying that Michigan lives and dies by the 3 is about as accurate as saying that we run a 1-3-1 defense all the time

Rather be on BA

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 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.