ADVERTISEMENT

Lunardi impact

Eight Legger said:
They beat Alabama and we didn't, and they have one fewer loss in conference. That's about it. Not to mention a worse loss than us. That's why I think it's so critical for Dayton to beat them and us to win out. If we finish second, we absolutely can go head to head with them on overall resume and win.
Click to expand...
To that point, if we had beaten Alabama or beaten VCU twice as they did, I think we would be where they are now. That is the difference of one game going either way.

All that said, Rhody should not feel safe just because they are in all brackets now. If they get a bad loss (not Dayton) added on soon, they are gonna slip right back to the bubble where we are now.
 
97spiderfan said:
To that point, if we had beaten Alabama or beaten VCU twice as they did, I think we would be where they are now. That is the difference of one game going either way.

All that said, Rhody should not feel safe just because they are in all brackets now. If they get a bad loss (not Dayton) added on soon, they are gonna slip right back to the bubble where we are now.
Click to expand...
One difference with their Bama game is, it was at home.

At Fordham or UMass would be devastating.
But at Davidson or SLU at home would only drop them so far...
 
VT4700 said:
Why single him out like he is being unfair to us?
Click to expand...

Not sure how that can really be a surprise to you. We've been talking about him since the spring. His name is the subject of the thread. He has most name recognition. And he's on our payroll which is and was an idiotic move by big hat no cattle Hardt. He's had lot of chances to put us in bracket or at minimum, closer to being in bracket, and he consistently hasn't. It's not outlandish either when we're on 38/93...if that is current. I mean who cares about Suzy and her wordpress bracket.
 
  • Like
Reactions: fatherspider
urmite said:
Speaking of Lunardi...
http://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketball/bracketology

ON THE BUBBLE
Last Four Byes
Last Four In
First Four Out
Next Four Out
Click to expand...

About 12 hours earlier he had Indiana in over Gtown...in his updated list. Neither played last night either. Now I'd put Gtown over IU too, the latter has a NET 63, 6-8 in B10 and has lost 5 of 6. But there was IU before this morning. So it really didn't make sense imo but it just shows this guy will flip more than pancakes.

Keep winning Spiders and we'll get in. Eventually Lunardi will have to catch on.

When he does I'm sending him a brand new shiny box to stand on for TV. Right now he shouldn't get to stand on a box, doesn't deserve a box. No more box that's what she said.
 
GKiller said:
Not sure how that can really be a surprise to you. We've been talking about him since the spring. His name is the subject of the thread. He has most name recognition. And he's on our payroll which is and was an idiotic move by big hat no cattle Hardt. He's had lot of chances to put us in bracket or at minimum, closer to being in bracket, and he consistently hasn't. It's not outlandish either when we're on 38/93...if that is current. I mean who cares about Suzy and her wordpress bracket.
Click to expand...
I do. Suzy is the best prognosticator of them all. And we don't need to pay her a dime.
 
Did Lunardi just publish a new bracket with absolutely no changes?
 
Cincinnati loses to UCF in 2OT for their 9th lose.
Seems like I saw in a post they were around the bubble
 
GKiller said:
Not sure how that can really be a surprise to you. We've been talking about him since the spring. His name is the subject of the thread. He has most name recognition. And he's on our payroll which is and was an idiotic move by big hat no cattle Hardt. He's had lot of chances to put us in bracket or at minimum, closer to being in bracket, and he consistently hasn't. It's not outlandish either when we're on 38/93...if that is current. I mean who cares about Suzy and her wordpress bracket.
Click to expand...
Hahaha Suzy has it all right.
 
Vandy sucks. Vandy STFU bama radford Hampton & 5th place caa Charleston. Thanks Lunardi.

Meat & Potatoes Hardt hired Lunardi for those specific games & anti PR. and Mooney got on board too. Unreal we did that & any Spiders fan I’ve talked to is like why the f would we do it. 15 year vet staff & they still don’t know scheduling.

Man we need some competency at the AD position.
 
Lunardi update...

2/28 bracketology - http://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketball/bracketology

In with Palm out with Lunardi. I also think Palm has a much better evaluation of Rutgers.

Lunardi and Hardt deserve each other they really do. Man if you guys could have seen them together in January when St Joes was in town. Great Meat & Potatoes meal. Joe ordered from the kids menu. They are kinda like that movie Twins with danny devito except the Arnold role would be played by someone like Louie Anderson.
 
Bracket matrix has us in 29 out of 94 brackets. It's not like Lunardi is crazy for leaving us out.
 
VT4700 said:
Bracket matrix has us in 29 out of 94 brackets. It's not like Lunardi is crazy for leaving us out.
Click to expand...

And not all those are updated. We've been in more brackets other times and out in his. We've been farther OUT in past in his than we should have been. That matters too. I'm not talking one snapshot in time anyway, these are updated twice a week. and this is obvious but Lunardi is most well known and we PAID him, he's on our payroll. We all love the Suzy from Wordpress bracket but Suzy doesn't have the same cache, just a different ass. Katz and Palm have had us in before and they are well known and get no $ from us.

The point is he has consistently held us back and I don't think that is in dispute, been tracking it all year. And u can say we hired only him for "consulting" (a job quite badly done imo) but if u r going to say it did not cross anyone's mind in the UR athletic dept that this would have some PR element to it I'd say u would also want a 1 way ticket to Wuhan. How could we not factor it? either we paid him really well and expected wink wink a little bump in PR with his brackets assuming we have a case (which we've long had) or reasonably we could have expected this hire will actually hurt us in that PR department because Lunardi will not want to look like he's playing favors (a la working for St Joes when he had them as 2 seed). That he'd be harder on his evaluation of UR resulting in essentially negative PR. Either way it all says stay the F away from that kind of hire, and it's not even factoring the ethics of it given his espn gig and their ties to NCAA.

All bad but heck if I had to rank it I think the worst is he just wasn't good at the scheduling part. Mooney was all ready to go one of toughest in A10 and he and Hardt (they are the decisionmakers) went bait and switch on us. If you're going to do that at least be right.
 
I don't understand why you're so worried about Lunardi's bracket. It has no influence on the committee. None.
 
VT4700 said:
I don't understand why you're so worried about Lunardi's bracket. It has no influence on the committee. None.
Click to expand...

I told u the reasons above, just look at the post u responded to. U said yourself u love looking at these, discussing these, so do a million Americans. why do u look at any. Of course there is a big PR element to it. The committee is human and fallible, there is zero doubt in my mind they look at the brackets of the most prominent people out there. Heck they have to in order to counter questions that come up of why X team left out, why seeded here. Don't be naive they look at them. And the more we're in the more acceptance seeps in. Should it have influence? No. But does it along with many many other variables we're all told they're looking at it? When u consider the human piece yeah it could. But that's not a concern of mine. What is a concern is we hired a guy to do a bad job, for no reason, and we've gotten negative PR out of it as result too. And that leads me to question our leadership a LOT. On what should be a year with a NCAA team! So I think it's very important.
 
SFspidur said:
Not sure the obsession with us and Lunardi’s bracket. We paid him to consult on scheduling, not put us in his bracket.

I’d actually be quite concerned if slipping him a few bucks could influence his brackets.
Click to expand...
I thought GK's obsession was about the poor job Lunardi did as a scheduling consultant, but he sure does bring up the latter quite a bit....
 
  • Like
Reactions: plydogg
SFspidur said:
Not sure the obsession with us and Lunardi’s bracket. We paid him to consult on scheduling, not put us in his bracket.

I’d actually be quite concerned if slipping him a few bucks could influence his brackets.
Click to expand...

Already said the worst part of it all was he just wasn't good at the scheduling part. I actually think the consulting gig of his is borderline unethical so to just assume any $ has no influence on him doesn't quite jive with that. If our AD did not consider all variables - again 1 is the hire part actually hurting us on the bracket part - then that's another huge problem. But possible given our pretentious AD. Maybe in Iowa they just say shut up and don't question.
 
ChoppinBroccoli said:
I thought GK's obsession was about the poor job Lunardi did as a scheduling consultant, but he sure does bring up the latter quite a bit....
Click to expand...

I answered that. Yes it was poor job. But if we didn't consider the optics that's crazy. I mean think about it. why lunardi? seriously why him. A 15 year vet staff and long time AD does not know scheduling. how is this possible. I don't think Lunardi is best guy for it, there are tons of analytical guys you could get for fraction of cost or FREE. & to not know if you were possibly going to get negative or positive PR means you can't go down that route when ton of options out there. Again I don't give Lunardi benefit of doubt either because I find it's a shady kind of hire anyway with some really grey lines on the ethics. A guy who will prostitute himself out there for this gig given the conflict of interest tells me he can be influenced. It was dumb on many levels but just the actual work piece was the worst.
 
GKiller said:
I answered that. Yes it was poor job. But if we didn't consider the optics that's crazy. I mean think about it. why lunardi? seriously why him. A 15 year vet staff and long time AD does not know scheduling. how is this possible. I don't think Lunardi is best guy for it, there are tons of analytical guys you could get for fraction of cost or FREE. & to not know if you were possibly going to get negative or positive PR means you can't go down that route when ton of options out there. Again I don't give Lunardi benefit of doubt either because I find it's a shady kind of hire anyway with some really grey lines on the ethics. A guy who will prostitute himself out there for this gig given the conflict of interest tells me he can be influenced. It was dumb on many levels but just the actual work piece was the worst.
Click to expand...
OK cool, GK.
It bothers me that we paid someone to help put together a schedule in which 10-3 was the bare minimum to even be in the conversation. Any Schmo off the street could have done that for free.
But the bracketology doesn't bother me. I don't think it influences the committee. You do. Theirs is the only bracket that matters.
 
ChoppinBroccoli said:
OK cool, GK.
It bothers me that we paid someone to help put together a schedule in which 10-3 was the bare minimum to even be in the conversation. Any Schmo off the street could have done that for free.
But the bracketology doesn't bother me. I don't think it influences the committee. You do. Theirs is the only bracket that matters.
Click to expand...

Actually to be clear I never said it influences the committee. In fact the chances of that r slim. But I don’t dismiss it entirely. Don’t we often talk about backroom deals in committee room all the time tho? Fallible human element at play. Plus these university admins r not the brightest bulbs out there. Heck that Ivy League penn coach was influenced wrongly. I just don’t dismiss the possibility.

But u right about any schmo. So then u ask well why Lunardi. Bc he’s well known maybe? We didn’t need him for scheduling I think everyone agrees on that. Maybe other motives. Again can’t dismiss it.

Look how we schlepped lunardi out for the radio spot & teased his hire. Different PR purposes. The PR element of it is the benefit of being in brackets including the most well known lunardi one. Richmond being talked about. That is a good thing. Free PR before tourney. And I think we can certainly deduce it hasn’t helped us w Lunardi. If anything it has hurt so we got negative PR. Again nobody can say lunardi is completely above board. The hire itself contradicts that imo. No matter how u slice it this move by Hardt & co. was idiotic. The actual scheduling part hurts us the most tho. But just saying don’t dismiss other factors.
 
Does anyone know what influence Lunardi was able to exercise to "upgrade" our out-of-conference schedule or what the schedule would have been had he not been hired to help or what our options may have been had he not been hired? If this has been posted already, I apologize, but there are so many posts on this topic, almost all negative, that I'd like to see the before and after as to Lunardi to decide for myself.
 
  • Like
Reactions: KWeaver
invinoveritasinaquasanitas said:
Does anyone know what influence Lunardi was able to exercise to "upgrade" our out-of-conference schedule or what the schedule would have been had he not been hired to help or what our options may have been had he not been hired? If this has been posted already, I apologize, but there are so many posts on this topic, almost all negative, that I'd like to see the before and after as to Lunardi to decide for myself.
Click to expand...
I don't remember the precise timeline, but we were committed to Barclays pre-Lunardi, and playing ODU was a given. Removing those 5 games gives us one Quad 1 game (Alabama), four Quad 3s, and three Quad 4s. He could've had his hand in all eight; nobody knows - or if they do they're not saying. Alabama was a good get, no doubt. Draw your own conclusions as to whether 4xQ3 and 3xQ4 constitutes an "upgrade."
 
ChoppinBroccoli said:
I don't remember the precise timeline, but we were committed to Barclays pre-Lunardi, and playing ODU was a given. Removing those 5 games gives us one Quad 1 game (Alabama), four Quad 3s, and three Quad 4s. He could've had his hand in all eight; nobody knows - or if they do they're not saying. Alabama was a good get, no doubt. Draw your own conclusions as to whether 4xQ3 and 3xQ4 constitutes an "upgrade."
Click to expand...

He had nothing to do w BC or South Alabama. It was the other 6 - already listed them. We had an ok base of games set but it needed to get stronger not weaker. Instead it got weaker. Those last 6 hurt the schedule. I make fun justifiably of that little meatball Lunardi but when we talk Lunardi we r really talking about Hardt & Mooney. 2 of the most highly compensated employees w unacceptable performance & decision making imo. Mooney told us we were going to get the toughest in A10. They knew w the “lunardi” last 6 there was NO way. Bait & switch. And guess what here we r with a team that should be in NCAAs that looks like they need to win 25 or gasp 26 games.

Let’s see if they trot out Lunardi again if this worked so well. I say they won’t. Frankly neither should get the chance without ncaa. 8 year ncaa drought & we get adults screwing over kids and a loyal fan base w lousy decision making which should have been obvious from the very beginning.

NCAA or bust
 
GKiller said:
He had nothing to do w BC or South Alabama. It was the other 6 - already listed them.
Click to expand...
Thanks, G - I must have missed your list in my haste to respond to Wine&Water.

So....
Alabama
Vanderbilt
Charleston
Radford
StFU
Hampton
.....correct?
 
  • Like
Reactions: GKiller
Btw look at the lunardi tweets...he had IU Cincy & Uri all IN this am. All 3 teams lost. he updates his seed lists 5 hrs later after those games....IU stays in same spot. Cincy after a non competitive game moves up! UP! & A10 team URI moves out. 1 seems to stand out than the other 2.
 
  • Like
Reactions: gospidersgo
The Indiana example is frustrating to me. A little over a moth ago they were mostly listed as a 9 or 10 seed. Since then they've lost 7 out of 10 games. All their games have been quad 1 except a home game vs. Purdue which was quad 2. So they've added 3 quad 1 wins which sounds good but if most schools got that many quad 1 chances they could win 30% of them.
 
Lunardi update...

3/2 bracketology - http://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketball/bracketology

Joe, joe, joey, uncle joe, F you Joe....2nd team out in Jabba the Hardt's emotional support dog's bracket.

As I mentioned yesterday, Cincinnati lost convincingly and moved up 3 spots! You guys don't like the NET well humans ultimately pick it and look at this human (tho I believe he's really just a Munchkin from Oz). Let's hope not a sign of what the committee of humans would do.

Heck when Indiana beats Minnesota at home this week it will be such a great win Lunardi probably puts them as a 8 seed.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

S
  • Poll

OOC Predictions

Replies
13
Views
825
UR Basketball Board
whampas
W
B

OOC Grade is in!!! No surprise, it's an F

Replies
130
Views
6K
UR Basketball Board
GKiller
GKiller
Section9.RowD

'24-'25 Spiders Friends and Family

Replies
42
Views
4K
UR Basketball Board
MrTbone
MrTbone
Anachnid

Making the Big Dance

Replies
46
Views
2K
UR Basketball Board
gcarter52
gcarter52
mojo-spider

2024 Richmond Spiders Football - Prologue - Hampton

Replies
4
Views
549
UR Football Board
ncspiderfan
N
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT
Top Bottom
Back