Serious question... are we to the point where the committee members know what the bracketologist "experts" say about who gets in and they are influenced by them? I'd say that with the amount of media around their predictions the answer is YES. Thoughts?
Do the Bracketologists now influence the committee?
- Thread starter fatherspider
- Start date
Im not so sure.
But all I know is I hope Pepperdine beats St. Mary's. The Gael's are overrated every year.
But all I know is I hope Pepperdine beats St. Mary's. The Gael's are overrated every year.
Honestly it wouldn’t shock me if the opposite is true to an extent, too. Like the committee looks at the final projections Lunardi makes and then goes , “Ok, a-hole, we’re putting in two teams you had out, just to F with you and keep your ego in check.”
And then one of them leaks it to him in advance so that he can "get 67 out of 68 correct."
I think the answer is no.
Speaking of Bracketologists, Palm's bracket hasn't been updated in over 24 hours, and he's gone dark on SM. With all that happened yesterday, that is odd timing for CBS to have stale info out there.
Funny
It's updated now. Texas is out.
Texas plays Texas Tech next. I have seen it referred to as an elimination game.
Some, like Palm, have them both outside. Others have them both in.
We are no longer his last team in. That's Cincinnati.
You mean the same Indiana that got swept by Wisconsin?
We've discussed this briefly, that's why I've consistently said there is much more to the Lunardi deal then just his bad scheduling which is #1. But there is no doubt the committee is aware of the primary ones, they have to be because they will get questions on teams who were IN or close and have to be prepared for it. Now awareness is not influence. And should there be influence? Of course not. But the human element is at play. Look at it this way...a guy like John Hardt could be on this committee. Heck our old AD Keith Gill was PICKED for it and A10 commish is only on it because she took his spot. These athletic admins are not the brightest bulbs in first place, and then you take a guy like Hardt who in his infinite wisdom says you know who we should hire because he's so smart, has so many connections, and understands NCAA selection better than anyone...Joe Lunardi! You don't think that kind of guy could be influenced? Geez we already know dumb as rocks Hardt can be influenced that is proven simply by the hire. If he thinks it's smart to hire Lunardi, well yeah he'd be influenced by him and put stock into his picks. So when you think if it that way....yikes.
If the committee members look at them and read them, they are influenced by them. Your point is a correct one... these members arent necessarily bball experts, but the bracketologists are seen as such, so I think some might take their word for it.
The big schools now think that Lunardi has pull with the committees and probably slipping him influence cash. He is from Philadelphia by the way, the breeding ground of criminals.
There was a good article in the RTD and about Bernadette and her role on the committee. She is assigned to the Pac 12 and mentioned how she has been staying up late to watch a lot of Pac 12 games.
I'm sure the committee is aware of the bracketogists, there are over 100 BTW, Lunardi is just the most high profile because he is on ESPN and ESPN has a huge platform that airs a lot college basketball games.
I think when the committee sits down, they have collectively watched a lot of basketball games involving tournament teams with a particular focus on the bubble teams. So, someone on that committee is watching us right now and they have been seeing us do a lot of winning recently. Someone on the committee watched Texas get their ass handed to them at home by a pedestrian Oklahoma State. So, who is playing good basketball right now, well someone on the committee knows that.
I don't think the committee cares one bit whether their bracket lines up with Lunardi, Palm, or any of the other brackets.
I'm sure the committee is aware of the bracketogists, there are over 100 BTW, Lunardi is just the most high profile because he is on ESPN and ESPN has a huge platform that airs a lot college basketball games.
I think when the committee sits down, they have collectively watched a lot of basketball games involving tournament teams with a particular focus on the bubble teams. So, someone on that committee is watching us right now and they have been seeing us do a lot of winning recently. Someone on the committee watched Texas get their ass handed to them at home by a pedestrian Oklahoma State. So, who is playing good basketball right now, well someone on the committee knows that.
I don't think the committee cares one bit whether their bracket lines up with Lunardi, Palm, or any of the other brackets.
PAC 12?
So while she can't report on the A-10, she can report on her evaluation of UCLA & Stanford...
It is just too bad we can't get Father on the committee...
I don't think that either. But u don't know what influences them. To say there would be no outside influences in a billion dollar sport with a history of shadiness in college sports is a little naive imo. Now I'm not THAT cynical I think for most part they do their best. But it only takes 1, especially if it's a close vote on a team.
A guy like Hardt well he obviously has some great opinion on Joe Lunardi. Maybe some other AD mistakenly does too. Just saying these committee members probably have people hitting them up left and right with all kind of stats and advocacy. I'm sure they are influenced by something besides just their own eyes and metrics. I don't want them to be but you can't dismiss it either.
10 votes. I've served on a jury in a serious criminal case. It's not easy, and only 1 person can makes things difficult, not too different here.
Seriously. Although, she said she is a night owl, so she doesn't mind. And quite obviously, she has to recuse herself from being involved in A-10 teams.
But I like that she is assigned to the league that has a lot of bubble teams competing against us. She can't talk about us, but perhaps she can trash some of our fellow bubble teams.
Do bubble watchers influence?
https://www.espn.com/mens-college-b...p-week-challengers-keep-eye-your-ncaa-bracket
"Atlantic 10
Richmond Spiders
Sometimes to win a game, you just have to not lose it. That may sound simple, but not beating yourself is a skill, and the Spiders certainly have it as they grade out among the elite in both free throw percentage and assist-turnover ratio. They finished the regular season with four players averaging over 12.5 points per game, and if they can get into the tournament, they are a bracket buster waiting to happen."
https://www.espn.com/mens-college-b...p-week-challengers-keep-eye-your-ncaa-bracket
"Atlantic 10
Sometimes to win a game, you just have to not lose it. That may sound simple, but not beating yourself is a skill, and the Spiders certainly have it as they grade out among the elite in both free throw percentage and assist-turnover ratio. They finished the regular season with four players averaging over 12.5 points per game, and if they can get into the tournament, they are a bracket buster waiting to happen."
Just the idea that they have determined who the bubble teams are, likely just from the bracketologists, is very alarming. There are so many teams that have almost the same record this year in conference play, that many of them should be on the bubble. Look at Xavier and Marquette, and even Arizona. These teams should definitely be on the bubble, yet they are "locks".
Similar threads
