Bracket Watch: February 21st, 2020

They’re a passionate fan base, no doubt. They played in Jacksonville last year when I went to the regional there and I found them to actually be a pretty good group of people. The Maryland and Wofford fans didn’t represent themselves nearly as well imo.

They certainly are passionate. I was at the Indy regional where we played them in the final. At least 80% of the place was blue, and not our shade of blue. That was a tough ticket.

1 Like

I saw Lunardi had UM, MSU, Ill, and Iowa all in the South bracket. Other than Maryland, to me that takes a significant chunk of the B1G out of contention for making a big run. I think all 4 teams are scary outs for the tourney.

It’s crazy how bad Lunardi is at his job. Dude literally has one job and has ESPN resources backing him, and he still can’t crack the top 50 on BracketMatrix.


Think of how little work he must do. Clearly he doesn’t spend any time trying to understand the committee or to learn from his mistakes, so he basically just throws together a bracket every couple days based on his intuition and he gets roll in dough.

I get ignoring injuries as you can’t play that game with every team but if there’s notable injuries that clearly affect a team I kind of want that looked at (personally). My memory may be off but Kenyon Martin was the classic example of a team being affected (negatively) by injury. I know they didn’t like it but they got bounced second round after dropping from a likely one seed lock prior to the injury. If they left them a 1 seed doesn’t that unfairly balance the seeding? Likewise last year didn’t Duke drop a couple games without Zion? I have to think that factored in to some extent in them being the top seed and it probably should. That said I think the implications of injuries have a limited scope and I think the one seed line thing makes some sense. The committee can’t obsess over injuries but significant ones to major players I can see the justification for it. That said I’m not sure Livers is that guy even though the data suggests how important his absence was.

Personally, I think these projection systems are ridiculous. It’s right up there with the nonsense systems(BPI and more) that ESPN is constantly parroting. We call all these guys “experts”, when they are just telling us the same thing that pretty much any fan could figure out. I’m sure I’m being rude, but that’s what I think.

1 Like

I see what you did there, Dylan, with your cunning wordplay: “without Isaiah Livers, to boot!”


Apologies, probably wise to read the by-line before posting…Tony!

1 Like

I feel like Auburn is a good example of the injury situation. Auburn has lost two in a row and is losing a third game. On one hand, they were out-performing their KenPom and probably due for regression, on the other hand Isaac Okoro – projected lotto pick – has missed the last 3 games.

How many of these adjustments are there across the field? How do you weigh them against each other? I don’t know what the answer is.

1 Like

Definitely hard to utilize across the board, but there’s a lot of “white space” on the team sheets. Maybe adding a section with games missed due to injury/suspension for each team…just to provide more context to each teams resume?

It’s nice to go on a late-season run and know that every new bracket on the matrix is going to have you look better. Great week!


If we’re aiming to get past the Sweet 16, would getting a 6 seed be better than 4/5?

As a 4/5 you’re going to have to playing the 1 seed I would think.

100% I’d rather be a 6 than a 4/5. Don’t particularly want to be a 7, but it wouldn’t be that much worse than a 4. I’d happily win out and get a 3 seed though :laughing:


So many casual fans don’t understand the difficulty of being a 4 or 5 seed in March Madness. Especially the history of 12 seeds being successful against 5s and if advancing, right away the 4 and 5 are generally the most evenly matched seeded pairs other than the 8 v. 9. Casual fans get caught up in the prestige of the higher seeded number, but don’t always know the historical nuances.

Why would you rather be a 6 than a 4 or 5?

Do more 12 seeds upset 5 seeds or more 6’s upset 11’s?

1 Like

A lot of times, the 3 seed in the second round is over seeded. It’s also psychological as well. As a 6 one is playing the hunter to get the upset. But it can be psychologically deflating to be in a 4 v 5 matchup because a team knows it’s playing against its mirrored image.

1 Like

Going back to the late 80s, a 12 seed generally pulls off an upset almost each year to get to the round of 32.

1 Like