Started By
Message
re: Lunardi hates A&M (State on Bubble)
Posted on 3/6/23 at 7:54 am to JayAg
Posted on 3/6/23 at 7:54 am to JayAg
quote:
Posted byMessageJayAgLunardi hates A&M (State on Bubble) by JayAgI need to check State’s record bc I’m surprised they are a bubble team on his latest update.
If you need to check our record and or schedule can you really be surprised we are on the bubble?
1
Posted on 3/6/23 at 8:10 am to MsState of mind
I completely understand aggies frustration with bracket projections, last year's shenanigans, etc. But at some point you have to understand how the system works and adjust. It's on the coach, athletic department, whoever you want to blame, but fix your damn OOC scheduling or quit bitching every year. I say this as a Razorback fan who watched Anderson do the same shite year after year. fricking "bubble watch" gets old.
Posted on 3/6/23 at 8:14 am to JayAg
People are putting too much stock in what Lunardi has to say. He made his bones off of one outstanding year. The committee will do whatever the committee wants. They will leave teams out that should be in. They will screw the seeding up........that's a given.
Posted on 3/6/23 at 8:21 am to trader_tiger83
Flip AU and Arky but yes
Posted on 3/6/23 at 8:27 am to JayAg
I think how a team is playing toward end of season should be considered heavily.
Teams like A&M, State, Vandy should get a closer look due to playing really well compared to say Arkansas or Auburn who is on a slide the last 10-12 games.
Teams like A&M, State, Vandy should get a closer look due to playing really well compared to say Arkansas or Auburn who is on a slide the last 10-12 games.
Posted on 3/6/23 at 8:31 am to Stonehog
quote:
They do that and then let in conference tourney winners that have no business being in a 64 team tournament.
I think conference tourney winners getting an auto bid should go away. A team with 14 wins getting lucky because the conferences top teams didn’t care to try and got knocked out shouldn’t get a bid over a 21 win bubble team.
Make the conference tourney games count where if you’re on the bubble it gives you a boost but no automatic bid. Or at least set a 20 win minimum limit to get an auto bid, and anyone under 20 wins who won a conference tourney gets a NIT auto bid
Posted on 3/6/23 at 9:11 am to deltaland
State played a decent non conference schedule and has a neutral site win over potential 2 seed and Big East champ Marquette.
20-11. No terrible losses, but about 5 games they should have won. They lost five conference games by a combined 15 points.
I think State is in, win or lose, if they beat Florida, they may avoid the play-in game pending some bid stealers, which there aren't a ton of opportunities this year.
Florida Atlantic is probably in from C-USA
St. Mary's and Gonzaga from the WCC
20-11. No terrible losses, but about 5 games they should have won. They lost five conference games by a combined 15 points.
I think State is in, win or lose, if they beat Florida, they may avoid the play-in game pending some bid stealers, which there aren't a ton of opportunities this year.
Florida Atlantic is probably in from C-USA
St. Mary's and Gonzaga from the WCC
Posted on 3/6/23 at 9:18 am to ThundrHawg
Beating #2 last weekend alone should get A&M a better seed than what it had leading up to the game. It will be interesting to see if they bring up conference tourneys this year in case the Ags don't win any games in Nashville.
Posted on 3/6/23 at 9:26 am to deltaland
Auburn’s last 2 games we went to OT on the road with Bama and beat UT. What’s the cutoff on recent results?
Posted on 3/6/23 at 9:28 am to Jster15
quote:
Buzz Williams historically has used the early season to figure out his team, and for the team to figure out his coaching. Last year was the same.
This is true and it is precisely the reason the committee changed its approach to weigh the complete regular season equally some years back. They did it to discourage coaches from using 1/3 of the season as pre-season warmup.
quote:
Those early losses are meaningless.
And, yes, the vast majority of fans complaining that 1/3 of the regular season was "meaningless" was the reason they wanted to discourage it.
quote:
A&M’s record since the start of SEC play has been amazing. 5 wins over top 20 teams, 6 quad 1 wins
This is why they'll more likely be a 5 seed or at worst 6 seed, like most mock brackets have them.
This post was edited on 3/6/23 at 9:29 am
Posted on 3/6/23 at 9:31 am to MrAUTigers
While I would love to believe that Lunardi doesn’t influence the committee selection process…. It could be that he is relaying things he is hearing.
The committee is inconsistent, and sometimes they are lazy and/or biased.
Body of work? The teams in the tournament are going to perform more like they did the last 10 games of the season as compared to the first 10 games of the season.
The committee is inconsistent, and sometimes they are lazy and/or biased.
Body of work? The teams in the tournament are going to perform more like they did the last 10 games of the season as compared to the first 10 games of the season.
Posted on 3/6/23 at 9:31 am to AGGIES
quote:
Body of work? The teams in the tournament are going to perform more like they did the last 10 games of the season as compared to the first 10 games of the season
This has been studied and there is very little correlation between the last 10 games and tournament performance.
Posted on 3/6/23 at 9:33 am to auburnnyc94
State finished the regular season with a loss, and went 3-3 with a 6 point win at home against South Carolina. Not sure what they're smoking to make them think they're even playing better than Auburn right now.
Posted on 3/6/23 at 9:35 am to jsmoove
A&M has great wins!
they also have real real bad losses
they also have real real bad losses
Posted on 3/6/23 at 9:36 am to SummerOfGeorge
quote:
This has been studied and there is very little correlation between the last 10 games and tournament performance.
You’ve got some data that would confirm this? I’d be curious to see what studies were performed.
The point is - is the correlation stronger between the last 10 games as compared to the first 10 games…?
Posted on 3/6/23 at 9:37 am to Wallacewade04
Any bad losses in 2023?
Posted on 3/6/23 at 9:39 am to AGGIES
quote:
You’ve got some data that would confirm this? I’d be curious to see what studies were performed.
The point is - is the correlation stronger between the last 10 games as compared to the first 10 games…?
It was a huge talking point like 10 years ago and the committee released a bunch of info on it to make it clear why they didn't use that as a data point any longer.
Basically, teams that finish "hot" generally don't just roll that into the tournament. Now, that's different than a team that's been playing well for 6 weeks. It was more "this team finished the regular season with 3 straight wins and then won 2 straight conference tourney games before a close loss to the #1 seed" (but was 18-14 overall).
Posted on 3/6/23 at 9:41 am to SummerOfGeorge
Ok. Got it. That sounds more like teams that get hot during the conference tournament only.
The thing is, these evaluations are not in a vacuum. They are relative to how they are evaluating other teams for the same spots…
The thing is, these evaluations are not in a vacuum. They are relative to how they are evaluating other teams for the same spots…
Posted on 3/6/23 at 9:44 am to AGGIES
quote:
Ok. Got it. That sounds more like teams that get hot during the conference tournament only.
The thing is, these evaluations are not in a vacuum. They are relative to how they are evaluating other teams for the same spots…
Yep, agree.
A&M would not fall into that category. They've played Top 10 level basketball for 2 months now per all the metrics.
Posted on 3/6/23 at 9:58 am to AGGIES
quote:
While I would love to believe that Lunardi doesn’t influence the committee selection process…. It could be that he is relaying things he is hearing
I've never seen evidence that Lunardi influences the committee all that much. His bracket tends a little more toward his opinion than many other forecasters who do a better job of "guessing" what the committee will decide.
Those of us that are in our 40s and follow college basketball closely remember all the arguments about eliminating "last 10 games" as a specific criteria for the committee. Like SOG said, there was never much more evidence of a team that finished 9-1 staying hot in the tourney than a team with lots of Q1 wins who ended the season on a low point getting hot at the right time. (However A&M has been playing well for 2+ months now so that's different than hot for the last 10 games)
However, like I said in previous posts, the main reason to do away with the last 10 games criteria was to discourage coaches from using the first 1/3 of the season as exhibition practice games and reward teams that scheduled more of the high profile OOC games fans want to watch.
This post was edited on 3/6/23 at 10:02 am
Page 4 of 6
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News