Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
bigtenfan

157 Seeding for NCAAs

Recommended Posts

I wasn't at the tournament, but following on track dashboard I thought Miller was actually losing at the time of the inj. def? I know there is a lag between real time and what is reflected on the dashboard, but there wasn't a guarantee Miller was going to win.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mr. Nolf should be the #1 seed...Pinned Imar in their first meeting and couldn't wrestle 30 seconds in bout two...Imar struggled the whole tournament without lung timeouts I doubt this would be a discussion...Seed wherever Mr. Nolf will be the NCAA Champion!!!

 

P.S. The PSU "Train"!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dumb post is dumb.  How do you seed someone who couldn't even win their conference tournament #1 overall?

 

Anyway for all the people arguing for Gantt #1 why does it matter if he's #1 or #3...he will still have to wrestle Nolf or Imar in the semis.  This the whole argument won't really matter when it comes to the matchups because no matter how it shakes out Imar, Nolf, Gantt and Miller will be #1-4.  Which means if the seeds hold they will wrestle a combo of each other in the semis and finals.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anyway for all the people arguing for Gantt #1 why does it matter if he's #1 or #3...he will still have to wrestle Nolf or Imar in the semis.  This the whole argument won't really matter when it comes to the matchups because no matter how it shakes out Imar, Nolf, Gantt and Miller will be #1-4.  Which means if the seeds hold they will wrestle a combo of each other in the semis and finals.

 

You're missing the point. A lot of people are arguing Imart and Nolf are head and shoulders above the rest, so they belong in the finals. If they're 2 and 3 or 1 and 4, one of them is not in the finals.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I also don't think it's a lock that those 4 guys are the semis.  I think Smith is close to 50/50 against Gantt and Miller, and he has a shot against Nolf and Imar.  

 

The seeds matter quite a bit.  The idea that seeds don't matter because you have to beat everyone to be a champion is dumb.  They wrestle a few hundred consolation matches and award 70 All-American plaques to non-champions at the NCAA every year.  Seeds matter beyond who wins the bracket.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The seeds matter quite a bit. The idea that seeds don't matter because you have to beat everyone to be a champion is dumb. They wrestle a few hundred consolation matches and award 70 All-American plaques to non-champions at the NCAA every year. Seeds matter beyond who wins the bracket.

They also matter a lot in the team race. Not as much this year, given PSU's horsepower, but if PSU is somehow going to place 2nd, the seeds will have a lot to do with it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I also don't think it's a lock that those 4 guys are the semis.  I think Smith is close to 50/50 against Gantt and Miller, and he has a shot against Nolf and Imar.  

 

The seeds matter quite a bit.  The idea that seeds don't matter because you have to beat everyone to be a champion is dumb.  They wrestle a few hundred consolation matches and award 70 All-American plaques to non-champions at the NCAA every year.  Seeds matter beyond who wins the bracket.

Agree, Smith is in the conversation, one of the best all position technical wrestlers & at least in B12s not making some mistakes of early season but still improving. I think he matches up better against Nolf than Martinez, not sure on Gannt and Miller. No one should want to wrestle Martinez in the finals, he knows how to rise to the occasion for the championship match. If Martinez is 1, Nolf should want to be 4, if Martinez is 2 Nolf should be happy to get the 3 seed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is from the NCAA Wrestling Committee Annual Report:

 

For 2016, the committee recommends that the qualifying tournament placement selection and seeding criteria only be awarded to wrestlers who earn a pre-allocated spot in their respective conference tournament. This puts more emphasis on the conference tournaments, rewarding conference champions and wrestlers that place within the earned allocated spots.

 

Does this affect Miller?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No one should want to wrestle Martinez in the finals, he knows how to rise to the occasion for the championship match. If Martinez is 1, Nolf should want to be 4, if Martinez is 2 Nolf should be happy to get the 3 seed.

 

I hadn't thought about it this way but you make some sense. I still think I'd rather be guaranteed second place in exchange for having to face Imart in the finals with more recovery and mental prep than in the semis, but I do agree Imart is more experienced and proven under the brightest lights than Nolf and therefore likely has a bigger "been there, done that" edge in the finals.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is from the NCAA Wrestling Committee Annual Report:

 

For 2016, the committee recommends that the qualifying tournament placement selection and seeding criteria only be awarded to wrestlers who earn a pre-allocated spot in their respective conference tournament. This puts more emphasis on the conference tournaments, rewarding conference champions and wrestlers that place within the earned allocated spots.

 

Does this affect Miller?

Sounds like it absolutely will.  Good find!  Those hoping Miller gets the 2 and Imar/Nolf separate at 3/4 are going to be disappointed.  According to this, Miller's seed will be penalized due to his at-large bid.  The question is how much?  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I did a little breakdown of the criteria and how I see it applying to the top 3 at this weight:

 

Criteria Weighted Percentage
Head-to-Head 25%
Quality Wins 20%
Common opponents 10%
RPI 10%
Qualifying placement 10%
Coaches Rank 10%
Win % 10%
Number of matches 5%

 

1.)The first 25% is eliminated.
2.) Martinez is 26-1, but I only really see 8(Top20) quality wins(Smith, Ryan,Cooper, MurphyX2, BergerX2 and Nolf). Nolf is 29-1, but he only has 8 as well(Brascetta,Walsh, Smith, Martinez, Murphy, Ryan, Berger and Cooper). He would have had 9, but Minotti won't count due to injury keeping him out of his qualifier. Gantt is 24-0 and has 10(CooperX2, Walsh, Pack, Boyle, Cottrell, Berger, Barnes and BrascettaX2).
3.)Pretty even. Gantt beat Cooper twice by Major. Martinez and Nolf beat Cooper by TF. Gantt beat Berger by Major, Martinez beat him 2x by regular decision. Nolf beat Berger by TF. Nolf beat Walsh by Major and Walsh was Gantt's only close match winning in OT. Gantt beat Brascetta by the exact same score as Nolf and also beat him a 2nd time.
4.)They are all top 3. I need to see the final RPI to see the exact order.
5.)Gantt and Martinez are even. Nolf taking 2nd loses this criteria.
6.)Interested to see the newest rankings. This is the one criteria I think could hurt Gantt.
7.)Gantt wins by being undefeated.
8.)Negligible difference.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I did a little breakdown of the criteria and how I see it applying to the top 3 at this weight:

 

Criteria Weighted Percentage

Head-to-Head 25%

Quality Wins 20%

Common opponents 10%

RPI 10%

Qualifying placement 10%

Coaches Rank 10%

Win % 10%

Number of matches 5%

 

1.)The first 25% is eliminated.

2.) Martinez is 26-1, but I only really see 8(Top20) quality wins(Smith, Ryan,Cooper, MurphyX2, BergerX2 and Nolf). Nolf is 29-1, but he only has 8 as well(Brascetta,Walsh, Smith, Martinez, Murphy, Ryan, Berger and Cooper). He would have had 9, but Minotti won't count due to injury keeping him out of his qualifier. Gantt is 24-0 and has 10(CooperX2, Walsh, Pack, Boyle, Cottrell, Berger, Barnes and BrascettaX2).

3.)Pretty even. Gantt beat Cooper twice by Major. Martinez and Nolf beat Cooper by TF. Gantt beat Berger by Major, Martinez beat him 2x by regular decision. Nolf beat Berger by TF. Nolf beat Walsh by Major and Walsh was Gantt's only close match winning in OT. Gantt beat Brascetta by the exact same score as Nolf and also beat him a 2nd time.

4.)They are all top 3. I need to see the final RPI to see the exact order.

5.)Gantt and Martinez are even. Nolf taking 2nd loses this criteria.

6.)Interested to see the newest rankings. This is the one criteria I think could hurt Gantt.

7.)Gantt wins by being undefeated.

8.)Negligible difference.

 

 

Just curious, but since Lehigh submitted Minotti for the final coaches ranking and RPI and allocation and then he didn't wrestle, would that win then count for Nolf?  Hope what I said makes sense.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I did a little breakdown of the criteria and how I see it applying to the top 3 at this weight:

 

Criteria Weighted Percentage

Head-to-Head 25%

Quality Wins 20%

Common opponents 10%

RPI 10%

Qualifying placement 10%

Coaches Rank 10%

Win % 10%

Number of matches 5%

 

1.)The first 25% is eliminated.

2.) Martinez is 26-1, but I only really see 8(Top20) quality wins(Smith, Ryan,Cooper, MurphyX2, BergerX2 and Nolf). Nolf is 29-1, but he only has 8 as well(Brascetta,Walsh, Smith, Martinez, Murphy, Ryan, Berger and Cooper). He would have had 9, but Minotti won't count due to injury keeping him out of his qualifier. Gantt is 24-0 and has 10(CooperX2, Walsh, Pack, Boyle, Cottrell, Berger, Barnes and BrascettaX2).

3.)Pretty even. Gantt beat Cooper twice by Major. Martinez and Nolf beat Cooper by TF. Gantt beat Berger by Major, Martinez beat him 2x by regular decision. Nolf beat Berger by TF. Nolf beat Walsh by Major and Walsh was Gantt's only close match winning in OT. Gantt beat Brascetta by the exact same score as Nolf and also beat him a 2nd time.

4.)They are all top 3. I need to see the final RPI to see the exact order.

5.)Gantt and Martinez are even. Nolf taking 2nd loses this criteria.

6.)Interested to see the newest rankings. This is the one criteria I think could hurt Gantt.

7.)Gantt wins by being undefeated.

8.)Negligible difference.

So I've seen that criteria on the NCAA manual.  But isn't that for only the Bronze Standard? It doesn't say thats the formula used for the Gold and Silver standards... I could totally be wrong but that is how I read it...

 

 

  1. The NCAA Wrestling Committee will use the following weighted criteria, in priority order, to evaluate the Bronze Standard wrestlers:

    • ●  Head-to-head competition — 25 percent

    • ●  Quality wins — 20 percent

    • ●  CR — 15 percent

    • ●  Results against common opponents — 10 percent

    • ●  RpI — 10 percent

    • ●  Qualifying event placement — 10 percent

    • ●  Win % — 10 percent 

https://www.ncaa.org/sites/default/files/2016DIWRE_PreChamps_Manual_20151008.pdf (page 13)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That manual doesn't specify the seeding criteria, but the prior manual does:

 

 2. Selection and Seeding.

For the 2015 Championships, the committee agreed to add
one additional coaches ranking, following the
conference/qualifying tournaments. Coaches on the ranking
panel shall have until 5 p.m. Eastern time the Monday prior to
selections to submit rankings.
The committee determined that the minimum threshold for
establishing Gold and Silver standards for the pre-allocations
shall be .700 winning percentage, Top 30 coaches rank, Top
30 rating percentage index (RPI). If wrestlers are tied, the
wrestler with the highest winning percentage shall receive the
allocation.
The committee will continue to use the following weighted
criteria formula to select at-large wrestlers.

Weighted Criteria Percentage
Head-to-Head 25%

Quality Wins 20%
Common opponents 10%
RPI 10%
Qualifying placement 10%
Coaches Rank 10%
Win % 10%
Number of matches 5%

The committee will also use that same formula as the guiding
principles in the seeding process
. The committee is exploring a
tiering system for unique quality wins similar to what is used in
team sports with more weight being given to quality wins over
top performers. Quality win is defined as a win against a wrestler
who earned Gold or Silver standard and also qualified for the
NCAA tournament.
The committee will continue to seed the top 16 wrestlers in each
weight class. There will be no requirement that wrestlers from
the same conference/qualifying tournament not meet in the first
round. Pigtail matches will be randomly selected from the pool
of unseeded wrestlers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That manual doesn't specify the seeding criteria, but the prior manual does:

 

2. Selection and Seeding.

For the 2015 Championships, the committee agreed to add

one additional coaches ranking, following the

conference/qualifying tournaments. Coaches on the ranking

panel shall have until 5 p.m. Eastern time the Monday prior to

selections to submit rankings.

The committee determined that the minimum threshold for

establishing Gold and Silver standards for the pre-allocations

shall be .700 winning percentage, Top 30 coaches rank, Top

30 rating percentage index (RPI). If wrestlers are tied, the

wrestler with the highest winning percentage shall receive the

allocation.

The committee will continue to use the following weighted

criteria formula to select at-large wrestlers.

Weighted Criteria Percentage

Head-to-Head 25%

Quality Wins 20%

Common opponents 10%

RPI 10%

Qualifying placement 10%

Coaches Rank 10%

Win % 10%

Number of matches 5%

The committee will also use that same formula as the guiding

principles in the seeding process. The committee is exploring a

tiering system for unique quality wins similar to what is used in

team sports with more weight being given to quality wins over

top performers. Quality win is defined as a win against a wrestler

who earned Gold or Silver standard and also qualified for the

NCAA tournament.

The committee will continue to seed the top 16 wrestlers in each

weight class. There will be no requirement that wrestlers from

the same conference/qualifying tournament not meet in the first

round. Pigtail matches will be randomly selected from the pool

of unseeded wrestlers.

Well that is much more clear.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My guess would be:

 

1. Gantt

2. IMar

3. Nolf

 

There is prior precedent in 2014 with:

 

1. Port

2. Stieber

3. Retherford.

It would seem the prior precedent was wrong then. Stieber beat Port.  And should have been seeded no.1.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It would seem the prior precedent was wrong then. Stieber beat Port.  And should have been seeded no.1.  

Actually, Port lost to Henderson(but beat him for 3rd).  Port did, however, beat Retherford to get into the 3rd place match.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually, Port lost to Henderson(but beat him for 3rd).  Port did, however, beat Retherford to get into the 3rd place match.

Oh yeah forgot.  Still, the seeding that year shows they try to get too cute with seeding.  Let's seed the 3 time defending champion at second or third.....?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm hoping that Miller's unique situation will give the seeders an excuse to make sure that Nolf & IMart are on opposite sides, as you can use his scenario to justify just about any seed between 2 & 4. 

 

Probably not, but it as least gives them an "out" for doing the Port/Steiber/Retherford thing based on numbers. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Section 1•2 National Committee
Mr. Troy Dannen – Term Expires September 2019
Director of Athletics
University of Northern Iowa

Dr. Billy Walker – Term Expires September 2018
Director of Athletics
American University

Mr. Brian Smith – Term Expires September 2019
Head Wrestling Coach
University of Missouri, Columbia

Mr. Bob Patnesky – Term Expires September 2019
Head Wrestling Coach
Davidson College

Ms. Valerie Richardson – Term Expires September 2017
Senior Associate Athletics Director
University of Virginia

Mr. Matt Whisenant, chair – Term Expires September 2016
Deputy Director of Athletics
University of Wyoming

 

Considering the committee is made up of 6 members with only 2 being DI Coaches(underlined above), I think many on here are expecting them to know more than they actually will about the individuals and certain matches.  The seeding system simply isn't designed for that.  It is meant to be impartial and based solely on this season's results.  Also, remember the head coaches cannot even be in the room when their wrestler is discussed.

 

There will always be headscratchers to knowledgeable wrestling fans, however, I have found that they have been pretty consistent recently on following a formula based off the criteria.

 

With that said, the criteria appears to have changed, weighting the Coaches Rankings a little heavier.  This may give us a better idea of seeds when we see that Ranking!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...