PDA

View Full Version : Bracketology for 2011.



Tmac5360
04-13-2010, 01:58 PM
The zags not getting much early love from Lunardi!!

http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/bracketology

Mr Vulture
04-13-2010, 02:05 PM
Fox Sports has Gonzaga as #9 preseason and I saw another one that had Gonzaga at #16....where does that translate to a #12 seed? Its the same team, with much more experience, coming back minus Matt Bouldin. I like Matt alot but I can't see him leaving being that big of a loss.

d2zag
04-13-2010, 02:08 PM
What a joke. This should not even be happening. Even then, that's stupid to have GU as a 12 seed. We will be at least a 7 seed. At least.

ellenvega
04-13-2010, 02:14 PM
Hey, we'd be one of those 12 over 5 upset picks! And we could get revenge over Syracuse in the next round. :)

Seriously, it's April.

SteelCityZag
04-13-2010, 02:15 PM
Lunardi, for all his knowledge of brackets is notorious for two things:

1) Having no clue as to any seeding beyond 1's and 2's (and who can't do this, really?

2) Under-seeding the Zags and any other school deemed a mid-major (sic) because they are in competition with his beloved St. Joseph's.

BoltZag
04-13-2010, 02:27 PM
I'm always amazed at the weight people give Lunardi. He was so far off on both seeding and geographic placement this year (and, frankly, most years), it's hard to take anything he says seriously.

He has conference winners in CAPS, but Gonzaga is not in CAPS...of course, neither is anyone else from the WCC...so apparently, no one will win the WCC next year.

Lunardi is hack. :rolleyes:

tinfoilzag
04-13-2010, 02:39 PM
Maybe he recognizes that the Zags are traditionally underseeded.

At least he doesn't have us as a #4-5 or #8-9. I would take a 12 seed in a second if we were healthy going into the tournament.

We've become the victim of our own reputation with people saying the Zags are overrated because we make the tournament every year but only go as far as the sweet 16. We are experiencing the backlash of being great but not a champion for too long. (See Buffalo Bills 91-94)

Columnists seem to be picking up on the trend of discrediting the Zags.

CDC84
04-13-2010, 02:47 PM
A bracketology right now is utterly pointless. For one thing, Lunardi doesn't have any idea what players will be staying in the draft and which ones will elect to come back to school.

ellenvega
04-13-2010, 02:48 PM
He only lists conference champs for the one-bid-only leagues.

BobZag
04-13-2010, 02:49 PM
He whiffed on Gonzaga's seed, but worse, really whiffed on...

Cal ain't going anywhere. Randle, Christopher, Boyken, Robertson, all gone.

Mr Vulture
04-13-2010, 02:56 PM
Gonzaga has major challenges from St Marys and Portland. I don't know about anyone else but I think St Marys without Omar is taking a step back although they tend to get solid Aussie replacements each year. I don't see Portland and the team that I am watching for is Loyola Marymount myself...not that I think any of them will be in Gonzaga class this year.

I think that national guys are underestimating the improvements usually seen between a guys first year and second year. I think that is typically the year that guys make the biggest jump. We have Arop, Olynyk, Harris, Kong, GJ, and even Sam that should be better than last year or better than what we had last year in Sam's case. Not to mention anticipated steps that Sacre and Meech will likely make as well.

MDABE80
04-13-2010, 03:10 PM
Steele's correct. After nos. 1 and nos. 2 seedings, Joe's rarely correct on anything. Further though, if GU's a 12, well...it's best the Zags are undervalued. How a team who has no NBA early departures and who is ranked 9-20 in the polls is called a 12...is beyond me.
CDC's noting that he does this when he doesn't know who's stayin on each his picks teams... kinda makes this a silly exercise. I suppose he's got to do something to earn a salary. Which brings me to another point...most of these writers only get paid if they have a column...so much the better if there's some controversy. It's in their interest and it's their job to say something...bad or good...just something!
We should remember that... it's a long 7 months coming up....beware of false prophets....:)

BobZag
04-13-2010, 03:49 PM
Gonzaga has major challenges from St Marys and Portland. I don't know about anyone else but I think St Marys without Omar is taking a step back although they tend to get solid Aussie replacements each year. I don't see Portland and the team that I am watching for is Loyola Marymount myself...not that I think any of them will be in Gonzaga class this year.

I think that national guys are underestimating the improvements usually seen between a guys first year and second year. I think that is typically the year that guys make the biggest jump. We have Arop, Olynyk, Harris, Kong, GJ, and even Sam that should be better than last year or better than what we had last year in Sam's case. Not to mention anticipated steps that Sacre and Meech will likely make as well.

"Gonzaga: The Zags face a more-serious-than-usual challenge in the West Coast Conference. Saint Mary's has confidence, and Portland has players."

Okay, I get SMC's confidence. But I'm sorry, Portland just lost Raivio, Campbell, Neidermeyer, Smuelders, they'll be lucky to keep from finishing last. Zags had little problem sweeping them last season and the Zags lose one guy. Hmmmmm.

FieldHouseFishHouse
04-14-2010, 04:20 AM
He only lists conference champs for the one-bid-only leagues.

This explains nothing.

BobZag
04-14-2010, 09:49 AM
kvetch kvetch kvetch kibitz kvetch! :D

I wonder how Jujaun Johnson and Etwawn Moore leaving Purdue will affect the Boilers.

ellenvega
04-14-2010, 09:57 AM
This explains nothing.

Of course not. I didn't mean it had anything to do with the Zags 'brackets'. :mad:

FieldHouseFishHouse
04-14-2010, 02:15 PM
Of course not. I didn't mean it had anything to do with the Zags 'brackets'. :mad:

The WCC is a one bid league in Lunardi's bracketology. I don't mean any offense or anything, but your explanation does not account for why the Zags an in "lower case". To be fair, I have also noticed he usually puts the auto bid in caps for one bid conferences. This one seems pretty sloppy, like he needed one more at large and just threw in GU for good measure, without checking to see if the WCC had another team in.

VinnyZag
04-14-2010, 02:24 PM
Lunardi just posted his 96-team bracketology projection. It's an abomination. Every ACC team makes the tournament; from the WCC, it's just No. 12 GU and No. 13 SMC.


http://sports.espn.go.com/ncaa/bracket?id=5071629

FieldHouseFishHouse
04-14-2010, 03:43 PM
Lunardi just posted his 96-team bracketology projection. It's an abomination. Every ACC team makes the tournament; from the WCC, it's just No. 12 GU and No. 13 SMC.


http://sports.espn.go.com/ncaa/bracket?id=5071629

Only 5 mid-majors (using that term very loosely) get 1st round byes. Utah St, Butler, Memphis, BYU and Temple. I fear that Lunardi's prediction might be all too accurate when it comes to conference representation and seeding.

BobZag
04-14-2010, 04:05 PM
Only 5 mid-majors (using that term very loosely) get 1st round byes. Utah St, Butler, Memphis, BYU and Temple. I fear that Lunardi's prediction might be all too accurate when it comes to conference representation and seeding.

Xavier, too. I do think Gonzaga will be an 8 seed or better next March, too.

VinnyZag
04-14-2010, 04:23 PM
I do think Gonzaga will be an 8 seed or better next March, too.

LOL

ellenvega
04-15-2010, 11:59 AM
Honestly this feels more like a 32-team tournament, if this plays out. Will the 'first round' even be televised? I'm thinking it probably won't be.

FieldHouseFishHouse
04-15-2010, 02:22 PM
Honestly this feels more like a 32-team tournament, if this plays out. Will the 'first round' even be televised? I'm thinking it probably won't be.

I think the whole point is to get more games on TV. The real question is: will anyone watch the "opening" round games.
My 1st hope is that this will fall through due to fan outrage, my second hope is that they will try this for a couple years and then drop it because the money never materialized.