Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
rda

Seeding 174

Recommended Posts

Looking at that weight with about 1.5 months to go into the season you could almost put the top 12 names in a hat and draw them out for seeding. It will clearly be a crap shoot on the National Champion come March which is very intriguing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Agreed. There are many interesting weights but this one has risen to the top. Luckily for us it's because of great wrestling and not the lack of talent at the weight.

Even B1G tournament will be insane.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Quickly off the top of my head, right now (and taking a quick look at the rankings), I'd say the seedings would go something like:

 

1. Storley

2. Kokesh

3. Perry

4. Asper

5. Evans

6. Brown

7. Heflin

8. Blanton

9. Stauffer

10. Brown

11. Munster

12. Zanetti.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Why not just put Matt Brown into #1? (I am just moving the discussion along to the inevitable)

 

I wouldn't put it past Intermat to rank him #1 tomorrow(not serious, well kinda, maybe sorta). The lovefest they have had for him so far along with Perry losing I am truly interested to see how they rank this weight tomorrow.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The thing with brown is when he wrestled Ruth close at the southern scuffle a year ago. He's good, but way overhyped by the machine.

 

Give me a break. He just beat Blanton. At least his hype isnt predicated on his high school career like Villalonga or Peppelman.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quickly off the top of my head, right now (and taking a quick look at the rankings), I'd say the seedings would go something like:

 

1. Storley

2. Kokesh

3. Perry

4. Asper

5. Evans

6. Brown

7. Heflin

8. Blanton

9. Stauffer

10. Brown

11. Munster

12. Zanetti.

 

Not a bad list. Would like to see some quality wins from Asper to justify him being top 5.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

NCAA seeding will be determined by the B1G tournament. What we DO know now is that the B1G tournament seeds will be:

 

1 Storely

2 Evans/Kokesh winner

3 Evans/Kokesh loster

4 Brown/Heflin winner

5 Brown/Heflin loser

6 Blanton

7 Munster

8 Yates

 

Put Perry at #2/3 and Asper at #5 along with the top 6 in order at the B1G tournament and you probably have your top 8 NCAA seeds.

 

If Evans wins, Perry is #2. Kokesh wins Perry is #3.

 

So assuming seeds hold at the B1G tournament (they won't, but whatever), here are your top 8 NCAA seeds:

 

1 Storely

2 Kokesh/Perry

3 Perry/Evans

4 Evans/Kokesh

5 Asper

6 Brown/Heflin

7 Brown/Heflin

8 Blanton

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why wouldn't Perry be the #1 seed? He is the highest returner and has one loss against a guy he's beaten twice and a win over the guy everyone here is saying will be #1. Is the assumption that Storley and Perry will meet at the National Duals with Storley winning?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's fair enough. I was talking about seedings rather than rankings, and I'm not sure how one could justify seeding Storley #1 based on the season so far or even the rest of the season assuming both he and Perry go undefeated the rest of the way. If Perry loses again to someone he hasn't beaten or Storley wins at the National Duals, then there's more to talk about when it comes to seeding.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
That's fair enough. I was talking about seedings rather than rankings, and I'm not sure how one could justify seeding Storley #1 based on the season so far or even the rest of the season assuming both he and Perry go undefeated the rest of the way. If Perry loses again to someone he hasn't beaten or Storley wins at the National Duals, then there's more to talk about when it comes to seeding.

 

This happens all the time. I distinctly remember Kyle Dake being seeded behind Frank Molinaro despite defeating him and having the same number of losses, but Dake lost closer to the end of the season.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
That's fair enough. I was talking about seedings rather than rankings, and I'm not sure how one could justify seeding Storley #1 based on the season so far or even the rest of the season assuming both he and Perry go undefeated the rest of the way. If Perry loses again to someone he hasn't beaten or Storley wins at the National Duals, then there's more to talk about when it comes to seeding.

 

This happens all the time. I distinctly remember Kyle Dake being seeded behind Frank Molinaro despite defeating him and having the same number of losses, but Dake lost closer to the end of the season.

 

Happened to Trent Washington of Northern Iowa at the Midlands. Zach Tanelli was seeded and he wasn't, despite the fact that he had pinned Tanelli a week or two prior to the Midlands. Never understood why Tanelli had such trouble with Washington, but he always did. Tanelli could beat guys that Washington couldn't beat, but he couldn't beat Washington.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
That's fair enough. I was talking about seedings rather than rankings, and I'm not sure how one could justify seeding Storley #1 based on the season so far or even the rest of the season assuming both he and Perry go undefeated the rest of the way. If Perry loses again to someone he hasn't beaten or Storley wins at the National Duals, then there's more to talk about when it comes to seeding.

 

This happens all the time. I distinctly remember Kyle Dake being seeded behind Frank Molinaro despite defeating him and having the same number of losses, but Dake lost closer to the end of the season.

 

That is a pretty good example. The difference is that Dake's loss was immediately before the tournament being seeded whereas Perry's is seven weeks out. I will still predict that Perry will be the #1 seed if he wins out, even if he does not meet Storley again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
That's fair enough. I was talking about seedings rather than rankings, and I'm not sure how one could justify seeding Storley #1 based on the season so far or even the rest of the season assuming both he and Perry go undefeated the rest of the way. If Perry loses again to someone he hasn't beaten or Storley wins at the National Duals, then there's more to talk about when it comes to seeding.

 

This happens all the time. I distinctly remember Kyle Dake being seeded behind Frank Molinaro despite defeating him and having the same number of losses, but Dake lost closer to the end of the season.

 

That is a pretty good example. The difference is that Dake's loss was immediately before the tournament being seeded whereas Perry's is seven weeks out. I will still predict that Perry will be the #1 seed if he wins out, even if he does not meet Storley again.

 

Your post at least insinuates that timing of a loss shouldn't matter if one wrestler has a head to head win and they have the same number of losses. You can't have it both ways.

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...