Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
FreezeWrestling

NCAA Qualifiers By State

Recommended Posts

lightweight,

 

I guess I didn't answer the question. 9 schools, 12 wrestlers.

 

Eds--3

St. Ignatius--2

Elyria, Copley, Chanel, CVCA, VASJ, Berea, and Brecksville--1 each

 

So, pretty similar numbers this year sounds like. More fuel for your fire that the Dapper Dan undercard should be a WPIAL (Pittsburgh) vs. Cleveland kind of thing.

 

Maybe someday...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"More fuel for your fire that the Dapper Dan undercard should be a WPIAL (Pittsburgh) vs. Cleveland kind of thing."

 

 

Well, at least once in a while would be nice.

 

It looks like the WPIAL has better AA prospects this year. Cleveland has only one sure fire. We may see Eds long streak broken (not meaning to put pressure on NS).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
-----

 

Hurricane, in your often overly verbose posts, you tend to mostly blow smoke and ignore the obvious. You are an expert in strawman arguments and obfuscation.

 

The essence of my message wasn't to say Iowa is the "best" wrestling state, but to show it is up there pretty high by most measures, and by one measure, ncaa qualifiers per capita, it is #1.

 

Pretty simple really. But that rubs you the wrong way, so you need to bring in Vermont as #1 with it's single qualifier, and go to great lengths to say FL is at a disadvantage with so many over 65 yrs old. You nitpick over my including your #1 Vermont in my list of major players, when it was only included because you had mentioned VT as #1 on a list. Completely irrelevant, but a "Gotcha" move there. You regularly post pictures that are carefully selected to make any Iowa guy look bad. Like recently ...ignoring the punch to DSJ's face by MSU's Watts, and only including limited pictures to make DSJ look bad. And so on.

 

Which brings up the question why?

 

I believe the answer is basically that you are an anti-Iowa troll. The more flagrant variety have been booted (e.g. "suzie" - a particularly vile poster whom you lobbied to get back in).

 

Maybe a quarter of your posts have the intention of denigrating the U of Iowa wrestling team.... its current coaches, individual wrestlers, Gable, etc. Even trivial items that might get in the news are fair game to blow up into something bigger. Remember the 99cent shoplifting incident involving a wrestler (Slaton)? You scoured the internet to find a picture of the store where it occurred, so you could post it...to ridicule Slaton. What fun!! You went nutty when Metcalf won the Hodge, and made subsequent posts lobbying for 3 loss, ranked #3 at 197 Hudson Taylor to win the Hodge, because he had a lot of pins, and Metcalf had "proven" that losses don't matter. The Hodge was forever tarnished. More recently you had a bunch of posts trying to prove Gable had a high school loss, contrary to all the published facts, by calling his jr HS a HS.

 

So, while I try to maintain some objectivity, and give credit to other schools and their wrestlers, you seem to have an agenda. Pretty pathetic.

Hmm...I've never seen anyone throw such a hissy fit simply because someone arranged the data about

HS wrestling/NCAA qualifiers on a per participant basis rather than a per capita basis. I suggest you try

to pull yourself together and cease whining that Iowa is always being victimized, Rossel. It's unseemly.

.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Every population group will have a spectrum of people with different talents and abilities, a Bell curve. Some are brains, some artists and some have natural gifts and aptitudes for sports. Having a base pool of 20 million instead of a base of 2 million will increase the odds of having a greater # of talented athletes (or geniuses or most anything one measures).

 

There have always been lies, dang lies and statistics.

National Qualifiers as a Percent of High School Participants per State:

MT: 3 out of 1,540 participants or 0.19%

WY: 2 out of 1,029 participants or 0.19%

Based on the number who also cut their teeth working on ranches & branding spring calves

…these states win hands down!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
There are different ways to measure the various states' contributions. By total # of qualifiers, PA is clearly the leader with 52 qualifiers vs #2 OH with 32.

 

On a pure per capita basis, the list of major players looks like this:

 

IA 4.8 (ncaa qualifiers per million population)

PA 4

NJ 2.8

OH 2.7

MO 2.2

MN 1.9

VT 1.7

MI 1.6

WI 1.4

IL 1.3

NY 1.2

OK 1.1

OR 1.0

CA 0.5

 

Where's Utah on your major players list? Six qualifiers divided by 2.8 equals 2.14.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 for Ohio is the highest in many years. They are typically in the low 20's.

Here is a link that the stat guys may like. http://www.census.gov/compendia/statab/ ... 2s0016.xls

 

Really? It's hard to find archives on this, but I do know that 2008 had 31 or 32* for Ohio. I don't know that that qualifies as "many years" ago.

 

Greater Cleveland had 20 or 21* as part of the NE District's 23 or 24*. Thus my claim that this year's 12 for Cleveland seemed below average.

 

 

*This list had been compiled by someone else (who will remain nameless). We resolved Caponi being listed twice, but I don't remember the resolution.

2008 NCAA D1 qualifiers by Ohio district

NE (24)

157 Josh Zupancic - Stanford/Walsh Jesuit

141 Pat McLemore - Northern Illinois/Padua

133 Dan Mitcheff - Kent State/Elyria

165 Kurt Gross - Kent State/Padua

285 Jermail Porter - Kent State/Firestone

184 Chris Honeycutt - Edinboro/St Edward

197 Jared Villers - West Virginia/Akron SVSM

133 Ricky Deubel - Edinboro/Kenston

165 Marcus Effner - Cleveland State/Garfield Heights

141 Keith Sulzer - Northwestern/St Edward

149 Dustin Schlatter - Minnesota/Massillon Perry

174 Steve Luke - Michigan/Massillon Perry

184 Mike Pucillo - Ohio State/Walsh Jesuit

141 Jeff Jaggers - Ohio State/Chanel

149 Lance Palmer - Ohio State/St Edward

157 Jason Johnstone - Ohio State/Massillon Perry

165 Dave Rella - Penn State/Walsh Jesuit

149 Ryan Lang - Northwestern/St Edward

184 Rocco Caponi - Virginia/Akron SVSM

285 Justin Dobies - North Carolina/Garfield Heights

184 Rocco Caponi - Virginia/Akron SVSM

149 Anthony Constantinio- Columbia/Lake Catholic

197 Dustin Porter- Gardner-Webb/Berkshire

197 Matt Koz- Tenn-Chattanooga/St Edward

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
There are different ways to measure the various states' contributions. By total # of qualifiers, PA is clearly the leader with 52 qualifiers vs #2 OH with 32.

 

On a pure per capita basis, the list of major players looks like this:

 

IA 4.8 (ncaa qualifiers per million population)

PA 4

NJ 2.8

OH 2.7

MO 2.2

MN 1.9

VT 1.7

MI 1.6

WI 1.4

IL 1.3

NY 1.2

OK 1.1

OR 1.0

CA 0.5

 

Where's Utah on your major players list? Six qualifiers divided by 2.8 equals 2.14.

:lol: Rossel's never been one for honest facts or objectivity. He claims that the above-listed 14

states are the "major players" when it comes to producing NCAA qualifiers "on a pure per capita

basis." However, he omits Utah, as you mention, as well as a host of other states.

 

California, who he asserts is the 14th-ranked major player, is actually 32nd on a pure capita basis,

the method he purports to have used. (Rossel is a California resident.) Utah is in the top ten and

has almost five times as many qualifiers per capita as California. (Cael Sanderson hails from Heber

City, Utah.)

 

IA - 4.90

PA - 4.08

WY - 3.52

MT - 3.01

OH - 2.77

NJ - 2.72

SD - 2.43

CT - 2.20

MO - 2.16

UT - 2.13

CO - 1.95

MN - 1.87

MI - 1.62

VT - 1.60

ND - 1.46

WI - 1.40

KS - 1.39

IL - 1.32

ID - 1.26

MD - 1.20

NY - 1.18

OK - 1.05

OR - 1.03

WA - 1.02

VA - 0.99

IN - 0.92

HI - 0.73

WV - 0.54

NC - 0.52

GA - 0.51

NM - 0.48

CA - 0.45

LA - 0.44

FL - 0.37

MA - 0.30

DE - 0.28

KY - 0.23

AL - 0.21

TN - 0.16

AZ - 0.15

TX - 0.12

AK - 0.00

AR - 0.00

ME - 0.00

MS - 0.00

NE - 0.00

NV - 0.00

NH - 0.00

RI - 0.00

SC - 0.00

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
There are different ways to measure the various states' contributions. By total # of qualifiers, PA is clearly the leader with 52 qualifiers vs #2 OH with 32.

 

On a pure per capita basis, the list of major players looks like this:

 

IA 4.8 (ncaa qualifiers per million population)

PA 4

NJ 2.8

OH 2.7

MO 2.2

MN 1.9

VT 1.7

MI 1.6

WI 1.4

IL 1.3

NY 1.2

OK 1.1

OR 1.0

CA 0.5

 

Where's Utah on your major players list? Six qualifiers divided by 2.8 equals 2.14.

-----

 

Doc, you are correct, and my list wasn't a comprehensive list, nor intended to be. A few other states that were high per capita qualifiers were also not included (WY, MT and some others).

 

I just picked states with the largest # of qualifiers ( what I called "major players" - 10 or more qualifiers) and added a few extra for different reasons . Those were Okla - historic contributor, Vermont - occupying #1 on one of hurricane's lists, and I threw in OR for no particular reason, other than I guess they were on my mind, Ore St having won the Pac !2, and I live out in CA.

 

No slight intended to Utah and some of the smaller states. My point was simply to show that Iowa, in a group with a decent sized # of qualifiers (15), was #1 on the per capita list. It's also #1 if you include the states with low number of qualifiers. Nothing sinister, and that stat can be taken for what it's worth.

 

Hurricane, as is his style will comb thru it and look for something, anything to pick nits over (gee, I rounded to nearest 10th, how many over 65yrs old, etc). Nothing new about that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
There are different ways to measure the various states' contributions. By total # of qualifiers, PA is clearly the leader with 52 qualifiers vs #2 OH with 32.

 

On a pure per capita basis, the list of major players looks like this:

 

IA 4.8 (ncaa qualifiers per million population)

PA 4

NJ 2.8

OH 2.7

MO 2.2

MN 1.9

VT 1.7

MI 1.6

WI 1.4

IL 1.3

NY 1.2

OK 1.1

OR 1.0

CA 0.5

 

Where's Utah on your major players list? Six qualifiers divided by 2.8 equals 2.14.

:lol: Rossel's never been one for honest facts or objectivity. He claims that the above-listed 14

states are the "major players" when it comes to producing NCAA qualifiers "on a pure per capita

basis." However, he omits Utah, as you mention, as well as a host of other states.

 

California, who he asserts is the 14th-ranked major player, is actually 32nd on a pure capita basis,

the method he purports to have used. (Rossel is a California resident.) Utah is in the top ten and

has almost five times as many qualifiers per capita as California. (Cael Sanderson hails from Heber

City, Utah.)

 

IA - 4.90

PA - 4.08

WY - 3.52

MT - 3.01

OH - 2.77

NJ - 2.72

SD - 2.43

CT - 2.20

MO - 2.16

UT - 2.13

CO - 1.95

MN - 1.87

MI - 1.62

VT - 1.60

ND - 1.46

WI - 1.40

KS - 1.39

IL - 1.32

ID - 1.26

MD - 1.20

NY - 1.18

OK - 1.05

OR - 1.03

WA - 1.02

VA - 0.99

IN - 0.92

HI - 0.73

WV - 0.54

NC - 0.52

GA - 0.51

NM - 0.48

CA - 0.45

LA - 0.44

FL - 0.37

MA - 0.30

DE - 0.28

KY - 0.23

AL - 0.21

TN - 0.16

AZ - 0.15

TX - 0.12

AK - 0.00

AR - 0.00

ME - 0.00

MS - 0.00

NE - 0.00

NV - 0.00

NH - 0.00

RI - 0.00

SC - 0.00

----

 

Wow... a larger list and now rounded out to nearest one hundredth of a per cent.

 

Yes, you uncovered my ulterior motive... to sneak CA in at #14, instead of their rightful place at #32.... I've been BUSTED!! :lol:

 

Btw, I noticed Iowa is still #1 on your expanded list, and you rounded them up to 4.9 instead of 4.8 where I had them. :D

 

What a joke you are Hurricane!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry, Rossel, but the fact of the matter is that Wyoming, Montana, South Dakota, Connecticut, Utah, Colorado, and North Dakota all rank in the top 14 states on a per capita basis. None of those states, however, appear on your list of 14 states - which you claim are the "major players" on a "pure per capita basis." Since you obviously can't explain that away, you're reduced to making silly, irrelevant comments and name-calling. :roll:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sorry, Rossel, but the fact of the matter is that Wyoming, Montana, South Dakota, Connecticut, Utah, Colorado, and North Dakota all rank in the top 14 states on a per capita basis. None of those states, however, appear on your list of 14 states - which you claim are the "major players" on a "pure per capita basis." Since you obviously can't explain that away, you're reduced to making silly, irrelevant comments and name-calling. :roll:

-----

 

So many nits and so little time, eh, Hurricane? :lol:

 

I believe the list did include all states with more 10 or more qualifiers, hence the term "major players." The per capita stats are given for those "major players." No, it did not include per capita stats for all 50 states.

 

It appears that you are having some difficulty grasping the concept. Hope that helps.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sorry, Rossel, but the fact of the matter is that Wyoming, Montana, South Dakota, Connecticut, Utah, Colorado, and North Dakota all rank in the top 14 states on a per capita basis. None of those states, however, appear on your list of 14 states - which you claim are the "major players" on a "pure per capita basis." Since you obviously can't explain that away, you're reduced to making silly, irrelevant comments and name-calling. :roll:

-----

 

So many nits and so little time, eh, Hurricane? :lol:

 

I believe the list did include all states with more 10 or more qualifiers, hence the term "major players." The per capita stats are given for those "major players." No, it did not include per capita stats for all 50 states.

 

It appears that you are having some difficulty grasping the concept. Hope that helps.

Actually, the only difficulty I see is the one you're having in trying to explain away your bogus list

of the top 14 "major players" on a per capita basis. Although you now claim that the "major players" are those states with at least 10 qualifiers, you included Wisconsin, Oklahoma, Oregon and Vermont

on your list. Unfortunately (for you), all four of those states have less than 10 qualifiers each, so they don't meet your new definition of "major players." (Plus you omitted Colorado, which does have 10 qualifiers.)

 

In short, either way you cut it, Rossel, your list doesn't hold water. It's not formulated on a "pure per capita basis" as you initially claimed. And its not a list of "the per capita stats...for those 'major players,'" with 10 or more qualifiers as you now claim. Even if I were to accept Colorado's omission as an honest mistake, "major players" (as you now define that term) would exclude four other states that nonetheless appear on your list.

 

I suggest you refer to BAC's classic "How To Construct A Logically Fallacious Rebuttal When You Know You Are Wrong by rossel3" and try again. Good luck. :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I would like to see Central and Western Pa per Capita you can give Philthy to Jersey we don't consider them part of Pa.

 

Give Nj philly and while your at it give us your disgraced state university and state capital (which went bankrupt) and we will clean them up also :lol:

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...