Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
hammerlockthree

Fix vs Gross/Lizak this weekend

Recommended Posts

34 minutes ago, russelscout said:

I get what your saying, but a seed at nationals should be based on your performance over the entire year. Not wrestling should effect your seed. How else do you incentivize wrestling? What's the lesser of two evils? A guy getting hurt because the top seed fell to his side of the bracket, or a guy who skips all legitimate competition and gets rewarded with a cake walk to the semis. I would say the former. 

I would say if they're going to seed the tournament, regardless of what happened in the season seed the bracket accordingly to whomever is considered the best wrestlers. "Punishing" Nolf by seeding him 3rd instead of 1st only really punished Kemerer. Had they "punished" Spencer Lee for missing the  beginning of the season the 125lb bracket would have actually punished the rest of the field.

Personally I think they should only seed conference champions and then created a fixed bracket based on placement at said conference as well as who your conference champ is similar to how PA does their state tournament. I think they should also do away with wild cards and if you default out of the conference tournament your postseason run ends, unless you "step on the mat and forfeit."

 

With that said, who are some examples that have "skipped all legitimate competition?"

Edited by BigTenFanboy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I didn't lie, I never saw your tweet (I don't use twitter). The last update I got was on facebook an hour or so before the event promoting that specific match. You say you guys released a statement on it and I believe you so I am taking back my complaint. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fix 6-1 with 2 TDs and a reversal in the 3rd.  He may be better on bottom then the rest of the OSU lightweights just by being tougher physically and better at wrestling.  

Also Lizak is not better at 133.  Healthier sure, but not better.  That leverage at 125 was unique and will not play the same at 133.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You can’t “punish” an athlete for missing a match. How are you to discern whether they were “ducking” or legitmately injured. And who said you can’t reward them for it, they’re not being rewarded for it. They’re given a seed based on their results over the course of the whole season. Players miss games all the time. What are you going to do, tell an Alabama all-American he has to sit out the first quarter of the bowl/playoff game because he didn’t play against LSU? Sorry but you just can’t do that. Elite wrestlers don’t get to the level they are at by avoiding challenges. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Lurker said:

You can’t “punish” an athlete for missing a match. How are you to discern whether they were “ducking” or legitmately injured. And who said you can’t reward them for it, they’re not being rewarded for it. They’re given a seed based on their results over the course of the whole season. Players miss games all the time. What are you going to do, tell an Alabama all-American he has to sit out the first quarter of the bowl/playoff game because he didn’t play against LSU? Sorry but you just can’t do that. Elite wrestlers don’t get to the level they are at by avoiding challenges. 

I was with you until you made the terrible football analogy.  That's a false equivalency.  The Alabama LB who skips a game or misses a game hurt is compromising his teams' chances of winning a game that matters.  If he is important enough the team loses and doesn't even make the bowl game or playoff.  That means missing any regular season game has a huge inherent penalty.  That's why Alabama played their star QB in a mostly meaningless game against the Citadel even though he was banged up.  In wrestling the regular season is 100% meaningless so there is no inherent penalty for missing matches.  I still agree you don't penalize guys for missing matches, but the football analogy doesn't work at all here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fix is in the mix for sure, but Lizak always seems to wrestle his best at the season end.  Last year Lee beat Lizak 15-0 in 2 periods.  Dominated every position and never even allowed a scramble, but at the NCAA's he turned it up and placed 4th.  The year Lizak took 2nd, he did the same thing and got on a good run in the post season.  I wouldn't count him out, but agree that Fix will be in the mix.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Lurker said:

You can’t “punish” an athlete for missing a match. How are you to discern whether they were “ducking” or legitmately injured. And who said you can’t reward them for it, they’re not being rewarded for it. They’re given a seed based on their results over the course of the whole season. Players miss games all the time. What are you going to do, tell an Alabama all-American he has to sit out the first quarter of the bowl/playoff game because he didn’t play against LSU? Sorry but you just can’t do that. Elite wrestlers don’t get to the level they are at by avoiding challenges. 

You don't discern between the two. If you are the starter and you miss then it hurts your seed. Best guys will still win out if they had to miss or get enough wins to keep them highly seeded, but it rewards people for showing up and wrestling. Thats a good thing IMO. We are currently rewarding people who do not wrestle because a potential high seed can just avoid competition and it doesn't hurt him at all instead of putting it on the line where their high seed is at risk. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, boconnell said:

I was with you until you made the terrible football analogy.  That's a false equivalency.  The Alabama LB who skips a game or misses a game hurt is compromising his teams' chances of winning a game that matters.  If he is important enough the team loses and doesn't even make the bowl game or playoff.  That means missing any regular season game has a huge inherent penalty.  That's why Alabama played their star QB in a mostly meaningless game against the Citadel even though he was banged up.  In wrestling the regular season is 100% meaningless so there is no inherent penalty for missing matches.  I still agree you don't penalize guys for missing matches, but the football analogy doesn't work at all here.

Agreed that it’s not a great analogy, but wrestling is such a different sport there’s not really apples to apples comparisons. 

Since you brought up the point of regular season being meaningless, should we start a rule that if Curry doesn’t play in a regular season game against Boston, he can’t play in game 1 of the playoffs?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, russelscout said:

You don't discern between the two. If you are the starter and you miss then it hurts your seed. Best guys will still win out if they had to miss or get enough wins to keep them highly seeded, but it rewards people for showing up and wrestling. Thats a good thing IMO. We are currently rewarding people who do not wrestle because a potential high seed can just avoid competition and it doesn't hurt him at all instead of putting it on the line where their high seed is at risk. 

Kind of my point. They are NOT rewarding an athlete for missing a matching. They are seeding them based on the entire work of the season. If they repeatedly miss matches against high level competition, they won’t have the resume to get the seed. But missing one match?  You said rewarding guys for not wrestling. I have yet in all my years seen someone receive a high seed without wrestling.  Let alone without wrestling and beating high level competition.  

So for example let’s say Nolf runs the table, except he didn’t wrestle Oklahoma State dual. The right thing to do is bump him down to three seed?  Who does that punish more, Nolf? Or the now 2 seed who otherwise been 3 and on the other side of the bracket than the concensus, unarguable best in the country. 

 

No, you CANNOT drop seeds for missing a match. Just not logical. 

Edited by Lurker

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Lurker said:

Kind of my point. They are NOT rewarding an athlete for missing a matching. They are seeding them based on the entire work of the season. If they repeatedly miss matches against high level competition, they won’t have the resume to get the seed. But missing one match?  

So for example let’s say Nolf runs the table, except he didn’t wrestle Oklahoma State dual. The right thing to do is bump him down to three seed?  Who does that punish more, Nolf? Or the now 2 seed who otherwise been 3 and on the other side of the bracket than the concensus, unarguable best in the country. 

 

No, you CANNOT drop seeds for missing a match. Just not logical. 

Yep.  That makes no sense.  A rule like that would be an attempt to use individual penalties to solve what is at it's root a team problem.  If team results mattered in any way, then coaches would wrestle healthy guys every chance they had.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Lurker said:

Kind of my point. They are NOT rewarding an athlete for missing a matching. They are seeding them based on the entire work of the season. If they repeatedly miss matches against high level competition, they won’t have the resume to get the seed. But missing one match?  You said rewarding guys for not wrestling. I have yet in all my years seen someone receive a high seed without wrestling.  Let alone without wrestling and beating high level competition.  

So for example let’s say Nolf runs the table, except he didn’t wrestle Oklahoma State dual. The right thing to do is bump him down to three seed?  Who does that punish more, Nolf? Or the now 2 seed who otherwise been 3 and on the other side of the bracket than the concensus, unarguable best in the country. 

 

No, you CANNOT drop seeds for missing a match. Just not logical. 

It is logical. Your crap anologies are not. We obviously wont agree on this. I'd hate to see Nolf fall if he missed a match, but at the same time it is better then never holding coaches and wrestlers accountable for missing matches in duals and not finishing tournaments. 

Let me ask you tho, if you are the #1 ranked guy at the beginning of the year, what is the incentive to wrestle a #2-#20 non conference match?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, russelscout said:

It is logical. Your crap anologies are not. We obviously wont agree on this. I'd hate to see Nolf fall if he missed a match, but at the same time it is better then never holding coaches and wrestlers accountable for missing matches in duals and not finishing tournaments. 

Let me ask you tho, if you are the #1 ranked guy at the beginning of the year, what is the incentive to wrestle a #2-#20 non conference match?

 

The seeds are not based on rankings, they are based on overall performance of the entire season. And you’re right we’re not going to agree, and as much as my analogies are crap in your mind, your position is just as illogical. As I very clearly said, if the #1 guy does not wrestle any of the 2-20, he’s not going to be #1. Not because of punishment, but because his resume doesn’t support it. 

I’ll go back to Nolf. Let’s say he runs the table, beats plenty of high level competition, but misses two weeks due to a sprained ankle. You can’t drop him based solely on him missing two weeks to an injury. Sorry but that is not logical. Again (read carefully) if he were to happen to ironically be injured and miss matches only against high level competition, different story. But that’s not what we’re talking about and not what is going on. We are talking about guys missing a match or two, and you’re making it sound like these guys don’t wrestle any competition during the season. They’re only suiting up against the Kent States and Citadels of the world. Then getting a high seed. That’s simply not the reality of the situation at all, and...not at all logical. 

PS- the incentive to wrestle 2-20 is the competition, development, etc. Again we are talking about elite wrestlers, who are not exactly known for avoiding challenges. That should factor into your thinking. 

Edited by Lurker

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Lurker said:

The seeds are not based on rankings, they are based on overall performance of the entire season. And you’re right we’re not going to agree, and as much as my analogies are crap in your mind, your position is just as illogical. As I very clearly said, if the #1 guy does not wrestle any of the 2-20, he’s not going to be #1. Not because of punishment, but because his resume doesn’t support it. 

I’ll go back to Nolf. Let’s say he runs the table, beats plenty of high level competition, but misses two weeks due to a sprained ankle. You can’t drop him based solely on him missing two weeks to an injury. Sorry but that is not logical. Again (read carefully) if he were to happen to ironically be injured and miss matches only against high level competition, different story. But that’s not what we’re talking about and not what is going on. We are talking about guys missing a match or two, and you’re making it sound like these guys don’t wrestle any competition during the season. They’re only suiting up against the Kent States and Citadels of the world. Then getting a high seed. That’s simply not the reality of the situation at all, and...not at all logical. 

PS- the incentive to wrestle 2-20 is the competition, development, etc. Again we are talking about elite wrestlers, who are not exactly known for avoiding challenges. That should factor into your thinking. 

It is logical, because showing up should be a factor. Let's say Warner from Iowa, wins out and conol from Kent state loses 1 match.Not likely but it could. Warner would have benefited by not wrestling that match and he would likely get a higher seed. Do you think Warner would have wrestled if it theoretically counted as a loss by ducking? I think he would have. I get that body of work matters in seedimg, but him ducking controlling what his body of work consists of by skipping a few tough matches early.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But how do you theoretically consider a loss by ducking?  Are the seeding committee members doctors. Do you really want to put it on them to decide whether or not an athlete was injured when they didn’t wrestle a match?  Of course not. And saying, okay you just do a blanket penalty for missing a match regardless, only hurts your argument. Because then you are punishing someone for being injured. And that is absolutely illogical. 

 

My opinion, the large percentage of these cases where people are crying “ducking”, the athletes aren’t ducking. They need to mend. We’ve become a fickle society where we get exactly what we want or we cry foul. In my opinion, that’s where this comes from. Just my opinion. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wrestlers are punished for being injured all the time. Case in point, the OK St Hwt today.  His finger was pointing sideways so that obviously wasn't a lung timeout.  But his opponent still got choice when the match resumed.  In that particular case, it didn't turn out to matter, but you get the point.

That rule seems to be a response to wrestlers taking advantage of that situation.  What's wrong with making a rule to keep them from taking advantage of another one.

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...