New Bracketology

kctom said:
Is it just me, or is it there too much still to be determined that will effect too many variables before Selection Sunday?

I can't even bring myself to look at Lunardi's Lunacy until that Sunday...
Click to expand...

Yes there is a lot to be determined yet. But that is what makes these bracketologist fun to look at as they can change on a daily basis. It is not called March Madness for nothing.
 
seepig said:
I don't care where we are seeded you have to win 6 games in a row to be National Champions regardless. While it is true you have a "better" draw if you are 6 versus a 13 but that said it comes down to playing your best ball and it depends on Fran doing his best coaching at tournament time. The Purdue win probably assures us of an at-large invite in the dance which I'm thrilled about. We could win 3 games or lose in the first round with this team. Just happy to be dancing once again this year. That said Fran has done a poor coaching job this year. The T's at Wisconsin ultimately cost us the game I suppose you could say that for the T in the MSU game since it went to OT. His new love fest with a 2-3 zone is mind numbing too. He's always been known as a changer of D he needs to do more of that particularly in the 2nd half. He doesn't seem to change once teams make adjustments.
Click to expand...


Hilarious that you put these two sentences back to back. Iowa hasn't been to the NCAA tournament since 2006, and the year they finally make it back to the big dance they had poor coaching LOL. I can't tell if you're trying to be funny or if you're actually serious.

I would agree that he's had some moments of poor judgment (few coaches don't have these), but to use those moments to label his entire season is quite over the top.
 
ssckelley said:
Yes there is a lot to be determined yet. But that is what makes these bracketologist fun to look at as they can change on a daily basis. It is not called March Madness for nothing.
Click to expand...


It seems pretty stupid to call it bracketology when he doesn't take the rules for matchups into consideration. Why bother putting them into brackets if they are totally impossible? Even some of his first round matchups are impossible according to the rules. He might as well just give a list of seeds.
 
Hawknigh said:
It seems pretty stupid to call it bracketology when he doesn't take the rules for matchups into consideration. Why bother putting them into brackets if they are totally impossible? Even some of his first round matchups are impossible according to the rules. He might as well just give a list of seeds.
Click to expand...
Obviously the way he handles this process is popular, or else he wouldn't do it. We know this is just wild speculation in terms of match ups. Who cares? It's just fun to think about the possibility. This is suppose to be a fun and exciting time. Let's just sit back and enjoy it.
 
Hawknigh said:
It seems pretty stupid to call it bracketology when he doesn't take the rules for matchups into consideration. Why bother putting them into brackets if they are totally impossible? Even some of his first round matchups are impossible according to the rules. He might as well just give a list of seeds.
Click to expand...

Would it make you feel better if they called it "Bracket Fun Time lemon drop lollipop"? It's not like it's called "Joe Lunardi's 100% guaranteed to happen I CAN predict the future Bracket page". smh.
 
clicheusername3 said:
Would it make you feel better if they called it "Bracket Fun Time lemon drop lollipop"? It's not like it's called "Joe Lunardi's 100% guaranteed to happen I CAN predict the future Bracket page". smh.
Click to expand...


Haha. Yeah, I kinda like that better.

Seriously, it is fun to think about matchups, but it would be so much more fun if he did a little work and paid a little attention to the rules for matchups and gave us something that actually had more than 0% of possibility. Even some of his first (second) round matchups are absolute impossibilities. I don't need him to help me think about those. I would like to see at least one "expert" propose at least one set of bracketology each week that actually follows the rules and has more than a 0% chance of being accurate.
 
Hawknigh said:
Haha. Yeah, I kinda like that better.

Seriously, it is fun to think about matchups, but it would be so much more fun if he did a little work and paid a little attention to the rules for matchups and gave us something that actually had more than 0% of possibility. Even some of his first (second) round matchups are absolute impossibilities. I don't need him to help me think about those. I would like to see at least one "expert" propose at least one set of bracketology each week that actually follows the rules and has more than a 0% chance of being accurate.
Click to expand...


Godaddy.com. Buy a website, learn the rules, make a bracket, make yourself happy.
 
kctom said:
Is it just me, or is it there too much still to be determined that will effect too many variables before Selection Sunday?

I can't even bring myself to look at Lunardi's Lunacy until that Sunday...
Click to expand...

Yes, this. No way this is what it looks like with all the games left to be played.
 
HawksMN said:
New Bub Watch out. Hawks now lock.
Work to do, Nebbie and Minnie. Neb has leg up IMO.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure about that.

Nebby has to play @IU and then home to Wisky. Minnesota only has Penn State left. Minny also has a better RPI than Nebby.

However, finishing 8-10 in the conference is sort of the kiss of death. I think the number of B1G teams that have made the dance with a losing conference record is less than 5 I believe.
 
OakRaiders said:
I'd just rather not play the clones again. That would be just too much for me i think.
Click to expand...

If we won it'd be awesome but playing your rival in a playoff situation is stressful as hell. I'm a Packers fan and when they played the Bears to go to the Super Bowl I was more nervous for that game then the actual Super Bowl.
 
OakRaiders said:
I'd just rather not play the clones again. That would be just too much for me i think.
Click to expand...

Because you are a fan of both teams or what? For some reason, I thought I remember you saying that in the past.

I would freakin love to watch the Hawks play the Clones again. The Hawks led the entire game at Hilton, and if it wasn't for a few missed free throws at the end they would have won. I'm not gonna say they should have, because free throws are important, but they most definitely controlled the majority of that game. I love their chances on a neutral court, and it would shut them Clown fans up for an entire year. Case would be closed. Sending them home from the big dance would be glorious.
 
Yeah but there's always that chance that those inbred dolts get lucky, and were not playing that great.
 
HawkeyeMHA said:
Yeah but there's always that chance that those inbred dolts get lucky, and were not playing that great.
Click to expand...

I don't care. I'd love for the Hawks just to have that opportunity. Plus if the Cyclones did win I wouldn't consider it "lucky". They have a good team, and Hoiberg is a good coach. I wouldn't make horse crap excuses like a lot of the robots over on CyFan would. I'd say you won and you deserved it. Just like if I was a Cyclone fan I would admit they got lucky to beat the Hawks in Hilton. Might as well call a spade a spade.

I like the Hawks chances enough to say screw it. Let's put them on a neutral court and see what happens.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Share this page

Top