This guy is out of his mind. Pitt is in with a win. Period. The ACC isn't only getting 4. Not to mention if UVa loses, how do you take UVa over Pitt? He mentioned our non-con SOS twice. What pisses me off about the ACC's business partner (ESPN) is if you want to trash one of your own teams, at least tell both sides of the story. This reminds me of Fox News or CNN telling one side. Lundardi doesnt want his employer's business partner in. Fine. But if you say there's never been a team with a non-con as bad as ours that's ever gotten in, you also have to say there's never been a P6 team with 7 road wins who has been left out. Why cant he say that or they make him say that?
Lunardi: Pitt needs 2 wins
- Thread starter Sean Miller Fan
- Start date
I saw this clip
This guy gets paid for this? Making ludicrous statements and then grinning like some 6th grader who steals your lunch money?
This guy gets paid for this? Making ludicrous statements and then grinning like some 6th grader who steals your lunch money?
He disgusts me to look at.
And the non-conference SOS is the dumbest thing I've ever heard. Go ask Muchigan about that. UNLV, East Carolina, Bowling Green. Yet their SOS was still 3rd overall, because it's almost as if the OOC games were only 25% of the regular season.
It's just picking one random factoid and running with it. Who cares if a team was 75th in OOC SOS if they were 200th overall? We're 66th in SOS. That's all that means anything. Why does this idiot contine to think he's onto some hot lead when really he's just showing how intellectually limited he is?
And the non-conference SOS is the dumbest thing I've ever heard. Go ask Muchigan about that. UNLV, East Carolina, Bowling Green. Yet their SOS was still 3rd overall, because it's almost as if the OOC games were only 25% of the regular season.
It's just picking one random factoid and running with it. Who cares if a team was 75th in OOC SOS if they were 200th overall? We're 66th in SOS. That's all that means anything. Why does this idiot contine to think he's onto some hot lead when really he's just showing how intellectually limited he is?
He has Pitt derangement syndrome, NW hass a 331 NC SOS and bad Q4 loss. And isn‘t your overall SOS more important? Pitt has the same SOS as UVA. Pitt has 4 road wins over 4 top 90 NET teams,
He’s ignoring other data such as wins away from home of which Wake has 4 (4-11)while Pitt has 8. (8-5). Having said that, what I fear that he’s plugged into the committee or has influence and they may have already written our obit.
So he’s saying no matter how well Pitt plays tomorrow, he will still have them out.
He’s ignoring other data such as wins away from home of which Wake has 4 (4-11)while Pitt has 8. (8-5). Having said that, what I fear that he’s plugged into the committee or has influence and they may have already written our obit.
So he’s saying no matter how well Pitt plays tomorrow, he will still have them out.
Last edited:
Lunardi is going to have some kind of mental breakdown if Pitt wins the next 2 games and NC State sticks in the top 75 of the NET.
He really, really, wants us out.
You can only start to take his bracket somewhat seriously Saturday night before the tournament announcement Sunday. He does not get inside information until then.
"Does Pitt have a Dental School?" - Joe Lunardi
Now he said KSt's win over Texas moves them to the top of Next 4 out (ahead of us). They are 19-13, 9-13 in the 1st 2 quads. Net 70 (will go up). This guy is on crack. They absolutely need to beat Iowa State tomorrow. They cant be 9-14 in the 1st 2 quads. You cant just credit these teams for showing up.
He is a Philly guy. Only natural that he has some disdain for Pittsburgh anything. Loser
replace 2 of Pitt’s home blowouts with a tourney where they lose to Houston and Purdue by 20-30 points and Pitt is 19-12 and a 10 seed,
It blows my mind that Lunardi and Kiper get paid good money for doing useless jobs.
He’s not plugged in to the committee beyond studying precedent and certainly doesn’t have any influence.
I think we are very likely in if we win tomorrow- but not an absolute lock- a few bid stealers and say KSU and / or Cinci making the Big 12 finals could keep PItt out — but a lot has to go wrong .
Nc st wining was sneaky important for PItt - ensure Cuse isn’t near the bubble and maybe NCSU gets back to a top 75 NET and give PItt another quad 1 win.
Here's another one. If Pitt beats Wake, loses to UNC, and NC St gets to Q1, Pitt would end 9-9 in the 1st 2 quads. I doubt there's ever been a P6 team with a .500 or better record in the 1st 2 quads ever left out.
Btw - Nova should be out even if they get it together in the 2H Vs DePaul- they look awful .
It's just brand recognition. Like McDonald's, no one is expecting quality.
I don’t think either Cincy or Kansas St is ahead of us with wins today. But we have to win. If we lose it’s all sort of meaningless.
But Cincy or KSU gets to the finals???
Maybe they take Oklahoma’s spot?
We should get Kansas spot two of their star players are hurt so the committee should determine they don't have a chance to win like they did to Florida State.
FOH Lunardi. Seriously, It’s supposed to be for fun and we all see if he is right afterwards. But the people that actually do the selections don’t watch enough ball. They don’t know Blake Hinson from my ass. So they lazy asses lean on something. And it’s the prognosticators.
So it becomes a self fulfilling prophecy.
So it becomes a self fulfilling prophecy.
If for no other reason than armed robbery is illegal, and the only way they are stealing a bid is at gun point.
Maybe not. But don’t think this committee watches hundreds of hours of hoops. They have no clue how this team has been playing.
I would guess that the committee members watch more basketball than most of the folks here do. It's actually part of what they agree to when they take the gig.
How many games do you suppose Scott Barnes watches? How many Pitt games?
Here's a thought, or rather, a fact.
Scott Barnes was the representative for the Mountain West Conference twice in the NCAA Tournament previously. This is his 6th appearance in the NCAA Tournament on the selection committee. You think he is going to be biased at all? I sure as hell do, especially for his mountain west teams and especially against Pitt.
I can assure you. Anyone that hires Kevin frickin Stallings when he was on the highway to getting fired at Vanderbilt does not watch a whole lot of basketball. Or, perhaps, Mr. Barnes does watch a ton of basketball and like Joe Lunardi, he doesn't understand anything about it.
Each member of the committee is given conferences that they are responsible for watching and reporting on. He would not have been given the ACC. Surely he would have been given one of the other western conferences, in addition to the PAC12, of course.
I thought we all knew that the Stallings hire didn't have anything to do with basketball and everything to do with cronyism. I guess not?
Those are bababooey chompers"Does Pitt have a Dental School?" - Joe Lunardi
I heard this last night as well after the NC State game and he was so sure that Pitt has to win two games to get into the tournament that he didn’t budge at all. This guy is a goof and I don’t even waste anymore time listening to what this moron says.
Well don't you think that it is fans like you that keep him employed ?
If you want him to go away , stop letting him live rent free.
He is stuck on the non-conference SOS and is cherrypicking that point because he doesnt like the ACC as a Philly/A10 guy. He doesn't tell both sides of the story. #1 there was intent for us to play a better schedule. WVU was a NC contender until Huggy went on a bender and Mizzou was seen as an NCAAT team. #2 we only play 11 OOC games, not 13 like some leagues currently or in the past. When you only play 11 OOC games, you cant compare current SOS to historical SOS records because those 2 fewer games give you less opportunity to make up for anchor teams. If you count 2 mid-tier ACC games against VT and FSU as non-con to give us 13 like some leagues, our non-con SOS probably shoots up by 100-150 spots. Would that make him feel better?
He may be right. He may be wrong. But win today before we complain.
Has anyone seen Joe Lunardi and Fireballz in the same place at the same time? I can't imagine there are two different humans who are that infatuated with emojis and obscure facial expressions.
And yeah - he definitely might be right. But what's annoying is him continuing to chew on only one piece of the pie and also him saying it with such conviction. As mentioned in another thread, we could have five quad wins by the end of the day. Yeah, we could also have two. That's why it's not as easy as saying we have to win the next two. We have to win today, and then we'll see.
And yeah - he definitely might be right. But what's annoying is him continuing to chew on only one piece of the pie and also him saying it with such conviction. As mentioned in another thread, we could have five quad wins by the end of the day. Yeah, we could also have two. That's why it's not as easy as saying we have to win the next two. We have to win today, and then we'll see.
This!!!! ⬆️ it’s Been my rallying cry for a week.
Plus, as you so eloquently stated elsewhere…not that he matters but he needs to be asked why he uses the “committee never selected a team with so low of a OOC” but he doesn’t use the “committee never omitted a team with 7 road wins” argument.
But it’s all moot. Win tonight. That’s all that matters. Win and we are in. I don’t think we need to win two.
I think I’m just trying to convince myself that we should be in regardless of tonight and that’s why the metrics are bugging the crap out of me.
We should play 5 OOC games against the MWC next season. Five very winnable Q1 opportunities.
