Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
unbiased

OK ST ranked #1

Recommended Posts

I couldn't care less who is ranked where, OK ST, PSU, IOWA, OH ST, Snyder, Imar, Gilman, Dean, it doesn't matter to me but why people decide to rank them where they do is what intrigues me. So to the topic at hand, why was OK ST ever ranked #1 in the first place? PSU won the national duals and the NCAA's last year. Now I would think that until the champ takes a loss they should remain #1. If the reason is because of what PSU lost from last years team I understand, I don't agree with the logic but I understand why some would think that it would be palatable. If the idea of lowering a wrestler or team in the rankings is because you don't know how good they will be then why not let them where they were from last season because you don't know how bad they will be either. Yes, I know Freshmen don't have college matches and its hard to rank individually but from the team aspect why not let it play out and see how they do as a group? BoJo #1 until he loses despite the few matches and injuries. Why not do the same for the team? So was the OK ST ranking warranted and PSU had to prove again that they should be #1 or was the ranking wrong all year?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Rankings have different formats and rationale. 

 

In situations where you look at rankings based on tournament points, it's a simple application of points to a ranking figure. If they placed at x-place, they'd receive x-points. Unproven wrestlers who can't warrant a ranking early move up and apply more points to their team's total. 

 

The others are the dual meet rankings. I'm not sure how WIN, Flo and InterMat do their dual meet rankings, but the Coaches Poll is just that, a poll of 16 coaches ranking teams 1-25 on their dual meet results. Oklahoma State started the year No. 1 based on returning wrestlers in their lineup. One rationale regarding OSU's projected strength at the beginning of the season was based on a few things, one being Mark Hall's redshirt status, another being Nick Nevills' status since he recovered from his injury that hampered him last season. Suriano and Hall are true freshmen, so their impact wouldn't be known until later in the year. So OK State gets the #1 nod. From a polling perspective, the #1 doesn't lose, hard to drop a team when they continue to win. Same is the case for most sports that use polls (coaches or media polls). Voters weren't unanimously voting OSU #1 all year, there were always a number of voters who were voting Penn State #1. 

 

Team points and a voting poll don't work with each other fluidly in most, if not all, cases. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OK State should have been #1 at the beginning of the year for the reasons stated by JB. That said, it made no sense for OK State to remain #1 when Penn State later had a higher ranked wrestler at 7 of the 10 weight classes, even without a loss. To keep OK State at #1 in the face of the individual rankings meant imbuing the Cowboys with some immeasurable quality outside of the actual wrestling on the mat.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Do the team rankings have any influence on individual seedings at NCAAs?  Not to diminish the role of team rankings, but I don't think it matters all that much why a team is voted #1 vs #2 or #10. It's not like football or basketball where rankings drive how well you do or where you're placed in the post-season, and I don't think coaches have incentive clauses in their contracts for team rankings (aside from the final team score at NCAAs, possibly) or "winning" National Duals like some other sports.  Team rankings are fun, but I'm not sure I understand why the ranking methodology is such a big deal if they ultimately do not matter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree that OSU should have started the year ranked # 1.  PSU had unproven talent, that throughout the season has proven quite nicely that they are deserving again of the number 1 spot. I thought when Hall came out, and defeated Crutcher, a week or so before, that they should have moved to number 1 then.  JMO.  It may not make for the most interesting tournaments, but it's sure fun to watch the great job the Lions are doing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree that OSU should have started the year ranked # 1.  PSU had unproven talent, that throughout the season has proven quite nicely that they are deserving again of the number 1 spot. I thought when Hall came out, and defeated Crutcher, a week or so before, that they should have moved to number 1 then.  JMO.  It may not make for the most interesting tournaments, but it's sure fun to watch the great job the Lions are doing.

Yep.  Everyone knew PSU could blow the doors off everyone by wrestling Hall at one of their weakest weights.  Until they did there was no doubt other teams were just as talented.  I think the biggest problem with metric rankings based on individual rankings is they don't take into account bonus points.  

 

So everyone uses a bonus free system that undervalues PSU, and PSU didn't wrestle there best lineup until January.  Anyone not having PSU before January should be forgiven.  Anyone not having PSU #1 after that is not doing their best to rank them accurately.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pretty simple to understand that you could not give high pre-season rankings to Suriano-Joseph-McCutcheon-Nevills. And Hall was not officially planned to be available. PSU worked their way up as that group of five proved themselves. Only beef I had was that PSU should have jumped over OSU in the dual rankings once the head-to-head bouts began to tip in PSU's favor. The recent dual result should not have been a surprise to anyone who actually followed the two teams.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pretty simple to understand that you could not give high pre-season rankings to Suriano-Joseph-McCutcheon-Nevills. And Hall was not officially planned to be available. PSU worked their way up as that group of five proved themselves. Only beef I had was that PSU should have jumped over OSU in the dual rankings once the head-to-head bouts began to tip in PSU's favor. The recent dual result should not have been a surprise to anyone who actually followed the two teams.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

I would have given them high preseason rankings. Same for Spencer Lee this next year. Wanna know why? Because it was for the PSU guys and will be for Lee OBVIOUS that they are better than all but a few guys.

 

These unspoken ranking rules are basically dumb. Especially, but not limited to, for guys with junior world successes. Just my $0.02.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I couldn't care less who is ranked where, OK ST, PSU, IOWA, OH ST, Snyder, Imar, Gilman, Dean, it doesn't matter to me but why people decide to rank them where they do is what intrigues me. So to the topic at hand, why was OK ST ever ranked #1 in the first place? PSU won the national duals and the NCAA's last year. Now I would think that until the champ takes a loss they should remain #1. If the reason is because of what PSU lost from last years team I understand, I don't agree with the logic but I understand why some would think that it would be palatable. If the idea of lowering a wrestler or team in the rankings is because you don't know how good they will be then why not let them where they were from last season because you don't know how bad they will be either. Yes, I know Freshmen don't have college matches and its hard to rank individually but from the team aspect why not let it play out and see how they do as a group? BoJo #1 until he loses despite the few matches and injuries. Why not do the same for the team? So was the OK ST ranking warranted and PSU had to prove again that they should be #1 or was the ranking wrong all year?

 

I would guess that OSO had more returning starters.  But when the newbies from PSU started to prove themselves, then the ranking should have adjusted in my opinion. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yep.  Everyone knew PSU could blow the doors off everyone by wrestling Hall at one of their weakest weights.  Until they did there was no doubt other teams were just as talented.  I think the biggest problem with metric rankings based on individual rankings is they don't take into account bonus points.  

 

So everyone uses a bonus free system that undervalues PSU, and PSU didn't wrestle there best lineup until January.  Anyone not having PSU before January should be forgiven.  Anyone not having PSU #1 after that is not doing their best to rank them accurately.

Everybody? I think I know of one system that takes bonus into account...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Would you call your system rankings?  I always considered it more statistical analysis more than traditional rankings.  But if you consider it rankings, then absolutely you consider bonus.

I consider the numbers themselves ratings, but the actual order of the wrestlers' ratings rankings.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For the record, I think even if Hall's redshirt wasn't lifted that PSU would've walked away with it this year.

Without Hall and Suriano penn state would have serious trouble winning. Granted that speaks to just how good they are at full strength.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Without Hall and Suriano penn state would have serious trouble winning. Granted that speaks to just how good they are at full strength.

 

I'd disagree, somewhat, even then. The problem for Oklahoma State is they only have 1 championship "favorite" (Heil), and he's easily the weakest returning NCAA champ. Almost no separation between him and the other top guys at 141. The rest of OSU's guys are all ranked, yeah, but ranked lower than the corresponding PSU guys. Plus, OSU's guys don't get nearly as many bonus points. The only guy who dependably works for bonus points with OSU is Brock. Rogers gets bonus points (when he isn't losing, lol) through pins, but besides those guys OSU is a bonus point wasteland. All the PSU guys work for those bonus points. PSU has 7 guys ranked in the top 5. Even not counting Suriano/Hall they still have more guys ranked in the top 5 than OSU does, 5 to 4 (although Schaefer comes close to cracking the top 5 at #6, as does Joe Smith). Speaking of...how in the HELL is Joe Smith ranked #6???

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The only known commodities Penn State had going into the season were Zain, Nolf, and Nickal. That's it. Suriano was a true freshman. Cortez a transfer and a big ?. Jimmy is Dr. Jeckyl and Mr. Guilibon. You never know which will show up. Cenzo is a freshman with no real collegiate experience. 174 was Morelli and Rasheed who were both guys with a lot of potential but still unknowns. Cutch is obviously undersized up a weight and never AA'd. Nevills is coming off an injury so who knew where he'd be. You could make inferences based on their incoming pedigrees but they had very few known commodities at the start of the season. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The only known commodities Penn State had going into the season were Zain, Nolf, and Nickal. That's it. Suriano was a true freshman. Cortez a transfer and a big ?. Jimmy is Dr. Jeckyl and Mr. Guilibon. You never know which will show up. Cenzo is a freshman with no real collegiate experience. 174 was Morelli and Rasheed who were both guys with a lot of potential but still unknowns. Cutch is obviously undersized up a weight and never AA'd. Nevills is coming off an injury so who knew where he'd be. You could make inferences based on their incoming pedigrees but they had very few known commodities at the start of the season. 

 

Hard to argue with this!

 

If I'd crank up the way-back machine and travel to Nov 1, 2016... I'd pick OkSt to beat PSU... then again, probably Clinton to beat Trump, too.

 

"Hindsight can be merciless. People of any given era often look back in time and wonder how their predecessors could have been so dimwitted. -James Balog"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd disagree, somewhat, even then. The problem for Oklahoma State is they only have 1 championship "favorite" (Heil), and he's easily the weakest returning NCAA champ. Almost no separation between him and the other top guys at 141. The rest of OSU's guys are all ranked, yeah, but ranked lower than the corresponding PSU guys. Plus, OSU's guys don't get nearly as many bonus points. The only guy who dependably works for bonus points with OSU is Brock. Rogers gets bonus points (when he isn't losing, lol) through pins, but besides those guys OSU is a bonus point wasteland. All the PSU guys work for those bonus points. PSU has 7 guys ranked in the top 5. Even not counting Suriano/Hall they still have more guys ranked in the top 5 than OSU does, 5 to 4 (although Schaefer comes close to cracking the top 5 at #6, as does Joe Smith). Speaking of...how in the HELL is Joe Smith ranked #6???

Ohio State is the biggest threat. They have 4 potential finalists, 2 likely bonus point champs, 2 other likely AAs and 2 long shot AAs.

 

They are likely to score over 100 points

Edited by Housebuye

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...