Lunardi's B1G rankings make no sense to me! Help me SS!

Donate To GopherHole
ltf said:
Today' Lunardi update:
6. Iowa
9. Ohio State
9. Nebraska
10. Indiana
11. Minnesota
Click to expand...

You could put those in reverse order and not be laughed out of an argument.
 

Last year Lunardi was busy ranking teams with ESPN's BPI metric.

He seems to be fed the company line more in his brackets than almost any other bracketeer out there.

If there are 100 hobbyists putting together brackets, I put Lunardi's about 50th.
 

Face The Facts said:
Last year Lunardi was busy ranking teams with ESPN's BPI metric.

He seems to be fed the company line more in his brackets than almost any other bracketeer out there.

If there are 100 hobbyists putting together brackets, I put Lunardi's about 50th.
Click to expand...

And I thought NET hated us, ESPN BPI takes it to a whole other level. Lots of teams with WAAAY worse sos and similar won-loss ranked ahead of us with this metric. Any idea the criteria here, efficiency? Makes sense that this is probably what Lunardi is using.
 

Face The Facts said:
Last year Lunardi was busy ranking teams with ESPN's BPI metric.

He seems to be fed the company line more in his brackets than almost any other bracketeer out there.

If there are 100 hobbyists putting together brackets, I put Lunardi's about 50th.
Click to expand...

Yup. Lunardi lost all respect when it comes to this stuff. I used to think that he actually paid attention to the games. Nope. He's spewing whatever metric ESPN is backing.

Got to start going to Jerry Palm at CBS. He's using results rather than ****ed up metrics.
 

stocker08 said:
Yup. Lunardi lost all respect when it comes to this stuff. I used to think that he actually paid attention to the games. Nope. He's spewing whatever metric ESPN is backing.

Got to start going to Jerry Palm at CBS. He's using results rather than ****ed up metrics.
Click to expand...

Lunardi is ahead of Palm in the bracketologist rankings. Though neither is particularly high on the list. In my experience it seems Palm is a little better at picking who will be in/out and Lunardi is better at seeding.

http://bracketmatrix.com/rankings.html
 


ltf said:
Today' Lunardi update:
6. Iowa
9. Ohio State
9. Nebraska
10. Indiana
11. Minnesota
Click to expand...

Eye test/non-conference imprint are why national people are still riding on Wisc/Nebraska/Iowa so much.

If you pay decent attention to B1G there's no way there's a 5 slot gap between MN and Neb/Iowa.

This one is much more realistic with Neb/Wis/Iowa/Gophers/Ohio State all bunched up between 8-10: https://www.cbssports.com/collegebasketball/bracketology/bracket
 
Last edited:


ltf said:
And I thought NET hated us, ESPN BPI takes it to a whole other level. Lots of teams with WAAAY worse sos and similar won-loss ranked ahead of us with this metric. Any idea the criteria here, efficiency? Makes sense that this is probably what Lunardi is using.
Click to expand...

What I hated about BPI was:

1. ESPN's self-created, self-marketed rating.
2. Gave very little info as to what contributed to the index.

If you want to create and index, fine, but have some transparency about what you are measuring. ESPN's BPI is unusually vague in this matter.
 

SS is right. Nobody truly knows to what extent the NET will be used by the NCAA on Selection Sunday, given this is the first year of it's existence. That said, I REALLY doubt the NET will be the end-all be-all. I would bet money that the NCAA will be using multiple metrics, while also looking at the resumes as well. Lunardi is creating his bracket by mostly using the order of the NET, and that seems to be it. If the NET is the only metric that will be used, we'll have unbelievably flawed seeding come Selection Sunday.
 



gopherguy15 said:
SS is right. Nobody truly knows to what extent the NET will be used by the NCAA on Selection Sunday, given this is the first year of it's existence. That said, I REALLY doubt the NET will be the end-all be-all. I would bet money that the NCAA will be using multiple metrics, while also looking at the resumes as well. Lunardi is creating his bracket by mostly using the order of the NET, and that seems to be it. If the NET is the only metric that will be used, we'll have unbelievably flawed seeding come Selection Sunday.
Click to expand...

It is public information that it is not the only thing used, not even close. Win games, win road games, beat good teams and we will be in.
 

And prior to last nights victory Wisconsin had lost 4 of their previous 8 games. And apparently two of those were to sh*tty teams including us and Western Kentucky. But obviously they are a 5 seed. Makes perfect sense.
 


Nebraska and Indiana continuing to prove they are hot garbage. Let's see how many in a row IU can lose and still rank above the Gophers in the computers. Rutgers!
 



Face The Facts said:
What I hated about BPI was:

1. ESPN's self-created, self-marketed rating.
2. Gave very little info as to what contributed to the index.

If you want to create and index, fine, but have some transparency about what you are measuring. ESPN's BPI is unusually vague in this matter.
Click to expand...

It also incorporates ESPNs garbage recruiting rankings
 



fmlizard said:
Nebraska and Indiana continuing to prove they are hot garbage. Let's see how many in a row IU can lose and still rank above the Gophers in the computers. Rutgers!
Click to expand...

As long as they are efficient losing, they will de fine!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

Finally some movement in Lunardi's rankings.

Minnesota a 9th seed
Ohio State a 10th seed
Nebraska a 10th seed (last four byes)
Indiana an 11th seed (last four in)
 

golfing18now said:
Finally some movement in Lunardi's rankings.

Minnesota a 9th seed
Ohio State a 10th seed
Nebraska a 10th seed (last four byes)
Indiana an 11th seed (last four in)
Click to expand...

This makes slightly more sense. How are Indiana and Nebraska still included?
 

golfing18now said:
Finally some movement in Lunardi's rankings.

Minnesota a 9th seed
Ohio State a 10th seed
Nebraska a 10th seed (last four byes)
Indiana an 11th seed (last four in)
Click to expand...

I have:
Ohio St 9 seed
Gophers 10 seed (the first ten seed, two spots behind the Buckeyes)
Nebraska 11 seed (last team in)
Indiana out (not even first four out)
 

Otis said:
This makes slightly more sense. How are Indiana and Nebraska still included?
Click to expand...

Because some of the first four out by most prognosticators are
12-9 creighton
12-10 butler
Mid majors like San Francisco and temple Who have solid records but few quality wins.
 

Otis said:
This makes slightly more sense. How are Indiana and Nebraska still included?
Click to expand...

Maybe recognition that the Big10 is the top conference, and their conference losses are against very good teams?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 


You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom