Lunardi Final 3 Out are BC, UGA and Bama

[SJeagle09]

Colorado is really surprising to me.

I also don't see the Alabama snub being major.

The Florida 2 seed after getting waxed by Kentucky is absurd.

[SJeagle09]

oh yea and the ACC was down but a 10 and a play-in is ridiculous

[BCEagle74]

At quick eyeball looks like Lunardi blew at least 3 teams.

VT and St Mary's and Colorado IN and now out (-3) and UAB and VCU and Georgia In who were out --(-3) -6

I had Colorado and Georgia and Alabama In (-2) UAB and VCU out who are in (-2) -4

One team either way, but I am glad VT and St Mary's are out. They both did not deserve it.

[bcmurph]

oh yea and the ACC was down but a 10 and a play-in is ridiculous

Yeah it's not like VT and Maryland Beat Penn State or anthing...

[BCEagle74]

Bilas going nuts, as I said via the twitter machine, he's been leading the anti-BC crusade for months.

Bilas was right, I had BC out like many others and he went a little overboard, but no matter, BC is NIT material and so was VT.

[BCEagle74]

ACC got hosed - Big Ten gets 7, and we have 4?

The ACC sucked and barely deserves 4 bids. I mean where have you been???

Is it every subject and sport that you can't read the thread or see how bad the ACC was?

This was a weak NCAA field and the ACC was not just weak....the ACC and BC and VT were poor teams and were poor late.

Is that much better?

Even Village idiot Gottlieb got it right. Why is Clemson in? The ACC deserved 3 bids and that is it.

Bilas mentioned every bubble team snubbed except.....BC.... Bilas is right.... BC is a NIT team.

[SJeagle09]

Bilas going nuts, as I said via the twitter machine, he's been leading the anti-BC crusade for months.

Bilas was right, I had BC out like many others and he went a little overboard, but no matter, BC is NIT material and so was VT.

He has said on a few occasions now: "every team on that snub list deserves to go over UAB or VCU. VT, Colorado, St. Marys or Alabama" (BC has been on that "snub list" every time but he refuses to mention us)

[twballgame9]

Per usual, the committee makes a shitshow of the brackets. The worst think of all is fucking Nova's seed. Really? Guess that one win over DePaul down the stretch was HUGE.

The overrating of the Big 101112 and the Big East made this year's tourney worthless. Not because they were overseeded on the high end, but because it made the shit teams at the bottom of the conferences look better than the mediocre teams in the middle of others. Penn State, Nova and Marquette are absolute travesties.

[bluefishskip]

UAB won the CUSA Regular season, had 10 Top 100 wins, and got rewarded. A little surprised, but comparing them to some of these other teams that didn't make it......they make sense.

VCU............played well early in the season. Beat UCLA in Preseason NIT, lost to Tennessee in a tight game throughout. 3 Top 50 wins, 8 Top 100, again better than most of the other bubble teams.

USC..........may be the shocker to get in. 6 losses to RPI 100+.........but also had more Top 50 wins than the entire group minus Colorado

Colorado had a handful of real top notch wins, but their road/neutral record was 6-11, so i guess that hurt them quite a bit.

USC: 5 Top 50 wins, 8 Top 100 wins
UAB: 1 Top 50 win, 10 Top 100
VCU: 3, 8
Harvard: 1, 3
Missouri ST, 0, 3
St. Mary's: 1, 3
BC: 1, 7
VA Tech: 2, 8
Colorado: 6, 2
Alabama: 4, 5

Bad Losses (RPI 101 or worse):
USC: 6
Alabama: 4
Colorado: 3
VA Tech: 3
BC: 2
VCU: 3
St.Mary's: 2
Missouri St: 2
Harvard: 1

[auggiebc]

I'll say it again. Record vs top 50 is just an awful barometer. committees need to erase this from their process. look at SoS and overall record and conference record. Those 3 things tell you pretty much all you need to know.

A team like BC had the 15th toughest schedule in the nation one week ago. They won 20 games. They finished tied for 4th in a power conference. Compare that against VCU, USC, UAB, and those shitty Big 10 schools and the result is that BC dances.

[bluefishskip]

Of all the years to go to 68 teams, this wasn't the best of years with the lack of quality teams at the bottom of the barrel.
Penn State got hot at the end when they needed to. Battle is one of the better guards nobody knows about. 5 Top 50 wins, 10 top 100 wins, again better than most of the teams in the discussion at the end of the bracket.

[apbc12]

Of all the years to go to 68 teams, this wasn't the best of years with the lack of quality teams at the bottom of the barrel.
Penn State got hot at the end when they needed to. Battle is one of the better guards nobody knows about. 5 Top 50 wins, 10 top 100 wins, again better than most of the teams in the discussion at the end of the bracket.

Plus, they're capable of 36-point outbursts in as few as 40 minutes.

[Eagledom]

i keep thinking of Reggie's missed 3 pointer against UNC. If that one shot goes in, BC is dancing.

[bluefishskip]

When comparing like teams on the bubble, the top 50 wins signifies which one of these bubble teams have actually beat someone this year.
BC's SOS is 38 right now (respectful), yet who did they beat? Can't say you know what, you played a nice schedule you ought to be in the dance regardless. Andy Katz said it last night, BC's best win was in November and they never book-ended that win with another quality win. All those ACC wins at the end were against poor teams. Any/all opportunities to add another good win were thrown out the window. BC had 2 wins vs. teams in the field of 68...........Texas A&M and Bucknell. That's it.

[twballgame9]

i keep thinking of Reggie's missed 3 pointer against UNC. If that one shot goes in, BC is dancing.

Yup, or two wins of the 4 WTF losses (and that's not counting Harvard).

[bluefishskip]

so should Wisconsin not be in the tournament for being even more pathetic with 33 points? Moot point on the Penn State 36 point comment, because they won that game. Equaled as many quality wins than BC had all season, and it was during Championship Week, when teams are further in the spotlight.

[twballgame9]

When comparing like teams on the bubble, the top 50 wins signifies which one of these bubble teams have actually beat someone this year.
BC's SOS is 38 right now (respectful), yet who did they beat? Can't say you know what, you played a nice schedule you ought to be in the dance regardless. Andy Katz said it last night, BC's best win was in November and they never book-ended that win with another quality win. All those ACC wins at the end were against poor teams. Any/all opportunities to add another good win were thrown out the window. BC had 2 wins vs. teams in the field of 68...........Texas A&M and Bucknell. That's it.

All of that assumes that the top 50 are "someone." It is a retarded measurable, period. I get the idea of trying to determine whether you can beat someone in the second round of the tourney, but trying to measure it when BYU and SDSU are in the top 10 of the RPI is shittastic Moneyball nonsense.

[bluefishskip]

then tell me at what point does any measurement or evaluation of numbers makes sense?

[apbc12]

so should Wisconsin not be in the tournament for being even more pathetic with 33 points? Moot point on the Penn State 36 point comment, because they won that game. Equaled as many quality wins than BC had all season, and it was during Championship Week, when teams are further in the spotlight.

I don't really care, but I'll be damned if I don't mock teams who combine for fewer than 70 points in an entire game. Also, the ACC was weak this year, but the Big 10 is weak every year. Every single year, there are at most two teams in the Big 10 worth a damn.

[DomingoOrtiz]

I just saw the brakets and have not been watching TV but I really hope the talking heads are killing the NCAA over PennSt. 1. They should be in; B) a hirer seed then the Clemson? WTF!

[auggiebc]

When comparing like teams on the bubble, the top 50 wins signifies which one of these bubble teams have actually beat someone this year.
BC's SOS is 38 right now (respectful), yet who did they beat? Can't say you know what, you played a nice schedule you ought to be in the dance regardless. Andy Katz said it last night, BC's best win was in November and they never book-ended that win with another quality win. All those ACC wins at the end were against poor teams. Any/all opportunities to add another good win were thrown out the window. BC had 2 wins vs. teams in the field of 68...........Texas A&M and Bucknell. That's it.

Michigan's best win was against a 14-loss, 7th place Big 10 team, and they got an 8 seed. You know why? Thier record vs Top 50 looked "really good". Translation. They beat a few other crappy teams who happened to have an RPI better than 50.

UAB's best win was at home against Virginia Commonwealth. By 3points. The only other top-100 games they played were Georgia and Memphis, and they lost both.

[Mitch]

When comparing like teams on the bubble, the top 50 wins signifies which one of these bubble teams have actually beat someone this year.
BC's SOS is 38 right now (respectful), yet who did they beat? Can't say you know what, you played a nice schedule you ought to be in the dance regardless. Andy Katz said it last night, BC's best win was in November and they never book-ended that win with another quality win. All those ACC wins at the end were against poor teams. Any/all opportunities to add another good win were thrown out the window. BC had 2 wins vs. teams in the field of 68...........Texas A&M and Bucknell. That's it.

I hear you...but...this also has to do with the schedule...BC only had 2 home games versus winning ACC teams: UNC and VT, and they went 1-1 in those games...the rest they had to play on the road: at Duke, at FSU, at Clemson, at UNC and at VT and then versus Clemson in the toruney on a neutral site. 2 home---6 away from Conte.

If VT hadn't beaten Duke, would there have been any discussion of them at all as an at-large bid?

The thing is---VT had Duke at home on a Saturday night ESPN game. Imagine if BC's one crack at Duke was at home instead. If VT could get hot for one game, so could BC because BC swept them.

While the ACC was young young young this year---even Carolina---it's a better conference than they are getting credit for. We saw that Clemson team (8 ACC losses)---they have a legit center and lead guard and they play outstanding defense---and think of this: Miami (19-14)...(10 ACC losses)...that team could make the sweet sixteen in the NCAA field this year, they are that capable. Maryland is no slouch either. Virginia Tech---same thing---a very good center and all-ACC lead guard---and they beat a #1 seed in this tournament in Duke---think VCU, UAB or Georgia could handle any part of Duke?

All this said...I hope BC is happy to be playing in the NIT with the chance to advance to MSG. I am proud of them---I think Coach Donohue and his staff have been working their tails off and getting as much or more out of this group than I ever dreamed of. Just look at the improvement the team made down the stretch on defense, starting with the UNC game at Chapel Hill. Plus, the style of play is a calling card---if you are a recruit and you see the way BC plays, you would love to play here now.

If BC had a legitmate big man who could block shots and score some on the inside---they would be a 5 seed in this tournament. They had the other parts and the coach to get them there.

[twballgame9]

then tell me at what point does any measurement or evaluation of numbers makes sense?

Depends on what numbers. The wins over top 50 is retarded. Make it 40 or 60, and the teams change dramatically. But creating a statistic with an arbitrary cut off like that "wins over top 50 RPI" is dumb.

Most of these guys watch as much basketball as you or I. I am confident that if they threw out the lame ass attempts to fall in line with the BCS/Moneyball trend of athletics, they might pick a better field and seed it appropriately so that Kansas and Duke didn't walk to the Final Four while overall #1 OSU has a brutal bracket.

But I am sure that analysis of OSU's bracket can be defeated with VORP or somesuchthing.

[DallasEire]

When comparing like teams on the bubble, the top 50 wins signifies which one of these bubble teams have actually beat someone this year.
BC's SOS is 38 right now (respectful), yet who did they beat? Can't say you know what, you played a nice schedule you ought to be in the dance regardless. Andy Katz said it last night, BC's best win was in November and they never book-ended that win with another quality win. All those ACC wins at the end were against poor teams. Any/all opportunities to add another good win were thrown out the window. BC had 2 wins vs. teams in the field of 68...........Texas A&M and Bucknell. That's it.

All of that assumes that the top 50 are "someone." It is a retarded measurable, period. I get the idea of trying to determine whether you can beat someone in the second round of the tourney, but trying to measure it when BYU and SDSU are in the top 10 of the RPI is shittastic Moneyball nonsense.

Agreed.

Top 50 is an asinine measureable with no real definition. As much as I believe the ACC to be significantly down this year there is NO WAY a win AT College Park and a win AT Blacksburg are not top fifty quality wins. Just fucking stupid and the measureable is a self perpetuation of whatever myth is built early enough in the season.

In this case, I believe the Big East is the strongest conference but Cincy as a six ? Really ? That won't work too well as Mizzou will give them a quick ball-washing.

In any case, I don't really believe BC was anything much beyond a one and done participant but that is no matter when we're simply comparison one shitty team against another. To see USC in on the back of the top fifty quality wins is a complete negation of the early part of the schedule. Same with PSU. If you are so fucking bad to start the season you should have to win your fucking conference tourney to push your way in.... especially if you're going to finish 19-15... Fucking joke.

By this logic wonder if Rutgers was a bad call away from sending a twelfth team out of that conference ?

[twballgame9]

When comparing like teams on the bubble, the top 50 wins signifies which one of these bubble teams have actually beat someone this year.
BC's SOS is 38 right now (respectful), yet who did they beat? Can't say you know what, you played a nice schedule you ought to be in the dance regardless. Andy Katz said it last night, BC's best win was in November and they never book-ended that win with another quality win. All those ACC wins at the end were against poor teams. Any/all opportunities to add another good win were thrown out the window. BC had 2 wins vs. teams in the field of 68...........Texas A&M and Bucknell. That's it.

All of that assumes that the top 50 are "someone." It is a retarded measurable, period. I get the idea of trying to determine whether you can beat someone in the second round of the tourney, but trying to measure it when BYU and SDSU are in the top 10 of the RPI is shittastic Moneyball nonsense.

Agreed.

Top 50 is an asinine measureable with no real definition. As much as I believe the ACC to be significantly down this year there is NO WAY a win AT College Park and a win AT Blacksburg are not top fifty quality wins. Just fucking stupid and the measureable is a self perpetuation of whatever myth is built early enough in the season.

In this case, I believe the Big East is the strongest conference but Cincy as a six ? Really ? That won't work too well as Mizzou will give them a quick ball-washing.

In any case, I don't really believe BC was anything much beyond a one and done participant but that is no matter when we're simply comparison one shitty team against another. To see USC in on the back of the top fifty quality wins is a complete negation of the early part of the schedule. Same with PSU. If you are so fucking bad to start the season you should have to win your fucking conference tourney to push your way in.... especially if you're going to finish 19-15... Fucking joke.

By this logic wonder if Rutgers was a bad call away from sending a twelfth team out of that conference ?

The BE is the deepest conference. I don't believe they have a single title contender. I will frankly be shocked to see any of them in the Final Four. But they may have 7-8 in the S16.

[DallasEire]

You have to hope Clemson doesn't piss their shorts in the play in game. I would like to see the ACC actually perform this year because this was an absolute repudiation of their conference. If Clemson gets by UAB they have a chance to get out to the sixteen. They are better than I thought and I like their coach a lot but Clemson is still Clemson like FSU is still FSU and they never really play well in this tournament.

I like the draw FSU received.

Duke also received their typical free ride with SDSU as their two seed. They may have tougher time with Tennessee in the second round and in fact, i think they stumble there. If they beat Tenn they will coast into the Final Four.

Carolina received a tough draw. THey have a tough second round game against UGA ( good interior game ) or Washington ( just plain good wild ass basketball ). They definitely won't match up well against Syracuse if they get there. They will force UNC to try and beat them from the outside and that is a good formula to beating UNC.


Overall, I will be hoping for as many Big East and ACC teams to advance... Fuck the Big Ten and Fuck the SEC... Florida is a two seed ? Just confusing.

[DallasEire]

When comparing like teams on the bubble, the top 50 wins signifies which one of these bubble teams have actually beat someone this year.
BC's SOS is 38 right now (respectful), yet who did they beat? Can't say you know what, you played a nice schedule you ought to be in the dance regardless. Andy Katz said it last night, BC's best win was in November and they never book-ended that win with another quality win. All those ACC wins at the end were against poor teams. Any/all opportunities to add another good win were thrown out the window. BC had 2 wins vs. teams in the field of 68...........Texas A&M and Bucknell. That's it.

All of that assumes that the top 50 are "someone." It is a retarded measurable, period. I get the idea of trying to determine whether you can beat someone in the second round of the tourney, but trying to measure it when BYU and SDSU are in the top 10 of the RPI is shittastic Moneyball nonsense.

Agreed.

Top 50 is an asinine measureable with no real definition. As much as I believe the ACC to be significantly down this year there is NO WAY a win AT College Park and a win AT Blacksburg are not top fifty quality wins. Just fucking stupid and the measureable is a self perpetuation of whatever myth is built early enough in the season.

In this case, I believe the Big East is the strongest conference but Cincy as a six ? Really ? That won't work too well as Mizzou will give them a quick ball-washing.

In any case, I don't really believe BC was anything much beyond a one and done participant but that is no matter when we're simply comparison one shitty team against another. To see USC in on the back of the top fifty quality wins is a complete negation of the early part of the schedule. Same with PSU. If you are so fucking bad to start the season you should have to win your fucking conference tourney to push your way in.... especially if you're going to finish 19-15... Fucking joke.

By this logic wonder if Rutgers was a bad call away from sending a twelfth team out of that conference ?

The BE is the deepest conference. I don't believe they have a single title contender. I will frankly be shocked to see any of them in the Final Four. But they may have 7-8 in the S16.

May be the case. I think Pitt and Louisville could break through but Notre Dame has a tough draw, Syr is too young ( but dangerous ), UConn is also too young and worn out, Georgetown is obviously contingent upon Chris Wright not having any issues playing with his broken wrist, Villanova is typical Jay Wright team that is burned out and going in reverse. They will not beat Mason. WVA is a junk team that hopefully gets beat by Clemson, St. John's has an interesting draw that could propel them toward the 16 but then they're a team that is ecstatic to just be there and I tend to think early melt-down for them.

Right now, on a quick glance:

SW: Purdue
SE: Pitt
EAST: Syracuse
West: Tennessee


Will not be suprised to see Louisville, Temple, Old Dominion, or Clemson prove to be dangerous outs... And even though I hate how they have played throughout the entire season i am hard-pressed to bet against Mich State in the tourney also.

[BCEagle74]

May be the case. I think Pitt and Louisville could break through but Notre Dame has a tough draw, Syr is too young ( but dangerous ), UConn is also too young and worn out, Georgetown is obviously contingent upon Chris Wright not having any issues playing with his broken wrist, Villanova is typical Jay Wright team that is burned out and going in reverse. They will not beat Mason. WVA is a junk team that hopefully gets beat by Clemson, St. John's has an interesting draw that could propel them toward the 16 but then they're a team that is ecstatic to just be there and I tend to think early melt-down for them.

Right now, on a quick glance:

SW: Purdue
SE: Pitt
EAST: Syracuse
West: Tennessee

I like the draw FSU received.


Will not be suprised to see Louisville, Temple, Old Dominion, or Clemson prove to be dangerous outs... And even though I hate how they have played throughout the entire season i am hard-pressed to bet against Mich State in the tourney also.

St. John's is in deep with a crippler injury to Kennedy, they might now be upset or one and done, but your analysis will be used in 74 's March for $3 million!

[DallasEire]

May be the case. I think Pitt and Louisville could break through but Notre Dame has a tough draw, Syr is too young ( but dangerous ), UConn is also too young and worn out, Georgetown is obviously contingent upon Chris Wright not having any issues playing with his broken wrist, Villanova is typical Jay Wright team that is burned out and going in reverse. They will not beat Mason. WVA is a junk team that hopefully gets beat by Clemson, St. John's has an interesting draw that could propel them toward the 16 but then they're a team that is ecstatic to just be there and I tend to think early melt-down for them.

Right now, on a quick glance:

SW: Purdue
SE: Pitt
EAST: Syracuse
West: Tennessee

I like the draw FSU received.


Will not be suprised to see Louisville, Temple, Old Dominion, or Clemson prove to be dangerous outs... And even though I hate how they have played throughout the entire season i am hard-pressed to bet against Mich State in the tourney also.

St. John's is in deep with a crippler injury to Kennedy, they might now be upset or one and done, but your analysis will be used in 74 's March for $3 million!

I don't know if Kennedy is too big a loss but I think a "happy to be here" attitude will kill the Johnnies along with drawing a better than rated Gonzaga team in round one. My thought is that winner of that game and it should be close will take out a BYU team that is clearly taking on water since the release of Davies. I never really believed in BYU any way as the only really good game they played was at SDSU. SDSU is the better team despite having lost twice as Fredette single-handedly got them out in Provo and then they hit 14 of their first 18 threes in their best performance in years at SDSU.

I always pull for the original Big East teams and the ACC so would like to see the Johnnies do well but think Gonzaga will get them in the first round.

I hate taking chalk even if that is how it looks on paper. I think you have to consider that there will be one unexpected team to break through for a long run. I am looking at teams that can easily lose in round one or roll from there. Tennessee, ODU, Gonzaga/Johnnies winner, Clemson / WVA winner, Mizzou has a favorable draw, and Purdue / Georgetown winner ( if GTown can find their equilibrium again ).

I would also like to see how many points Belmont and Richmond will be getting. I think FSU is a tough match for any team including Notre Dame in round two because they can defend.

Think overall that Ohio State and Duke received best paths to final eight as Villanova if they were to win might as well concede 30 and 25 to Sullinger. If Tennesee survives past Michigan and that game should be a ball-sweater than they are just wild ass enough to take out the Rat Face. Should be an interesting tourney but no BC blows a rubber dick.

Did you see USC's resume ?
Penn State's ?

USC lost to Rider by twenty. Fucking Rider. They lost to Bradley and you know how fucking bad TCU is ( lost by twelve ). They lost to Cal, Oregon teams every time they played either and once again Rider by twenty.

They have officially two wins and though they're good are they seriously good enough to overcome that mountain of shit they built early ? I guess they were....


On Penn State they lost to the conference that everyone thinks was horrible this year. They lost to VA Tech by ten on the road. They lost at home to Maryland by 23. They lost to the fucking Maine Blackbears by 10. Once again, they have a resume of beating other teams that cannot fucking score. A win over Wisconsin is good but beating Wisky outside of Madison is not that tall an order. I just cannot believe PSU and USC are in over BC.....

[BC923]

St. Johns has the easiest road to the elite 8 of any 6 seed ever. Gonzaga, BYU, then Florida most likely. Even with Lavin at the helm that is ridiculously easy.