Jump to content
fadzaev2

Toughest weight bracket, all-time at the NCAA's

Recommended Posts

 

I I gave Schlatter one too many pts.  but I Cut/pasted your's and will adjust point to what I have:...I think you have a couple mistakes, mostly on your non AA entrants...also, I didn't have Fisch...missed him all together....

fadz, make sure i have this done right... I dont match any of your totals...

. 2008 149 

Metcalf 1,2,1    16+6+8= 30

Jenkins 2,1    12+8= 20

Burroughs  3,1,1   10+8+8= 26

J churella 8,2, 4    3+12+9 = 24

Caldwell 5, 1  7+8= 15

OConnor  5,6 ,1  7+6+8=21

Schlatter 1,3, 7    16+10+4=30  (I had 31...30 is correct)

Palmer 4,8,4,2   9+3+4.5+6=22.5 

188.5    (correct)

non AA entrants

Fisch  4,5, DNP   9+7=16   (I missed Fisch altogether...Rider says he only placed once t=5th)  7 pts.

Patacsil DNP, 5    3.5+6=9.5  (Patacsil only placed once 5th)  3.5

Lang 2, DNP   12+2=14  (Lang placed twice   4   2   9+12   21)

Saddoris DNP, 6,7  3+2=5  (correct)

Hall DNP,3,5  5_+7= 12        (Hall placed 3rd and 5th   5+3.5)  8.5

56.5   (I get 45)

total 245    (I now get 233.5)

My biggest mistake was I didn't have Fisch,  and I had given Schlatter 1 too many......I can check the other 2 wts. later....see if this looks correct now.  Fadz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i must have gone too fast the first time i did this

i may have to go back.

i think someone told me fisch was a 2x AA... but you are right.. i can't find the 4thplace.

lang i got all messed up, he went 4,2,DNP

not sure how i messed up patacsil

and hall i messed up the points for 5th being half.

looks good to me!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/9/2019 at 9:43 AM, GockeS said:

new number 1

1. 2008   149

non AA entrants

Fisch  4,5, DNP   9 

Patacsil DNP, 5    2

Lang 2, DNP   7

Saddoris DNP, 6,7  2.5 

Hall DNP,3,5  5

25.5

total 126

this is what i had the first time I posted the Non AA

so basically the error i have is not giving lang 4th place previous points and giving them to fisch.

and patacsil i had getting 5th only once.. so that was right.

maybe when i copied and pasted i got it in with something else... 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1. 2009 125

Nickerson 2, 3, 1, 4     12+10+16+4.5= 42.5

Donahoe  1,3,        16+10+12 = 38

Precin  7, 3,  3         4+10 + 5   = 19

Robles  4, 7, 1        9+2+8  = 19

Escobedo  4,1, 5 , 3   9+16+7+5  = 37

Sanders 6, 5,5,3      6+3.5+3.5+5 = 18

Sentes  7, 4         4+4.5  = 8.5

Bedelyon 8, 6     3+ 3  = 6

188

non AA entrants

Blanc 6, DNP      =6

Futrell DNP, 8,6   1.5 + 3 = 4.5

Falck 8,6, DNP   3+6= 9

Triggas DNP, 8      =1.5

Garnett DNP, 6      = 3

Nicholson 8, DNP, 8,     3+1.5 = 4.5

Bonano DNP, 8      =1.5

40

total 218

 

Edited by GockeS

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

this is what i have for 1994 158

1994  158

Pat Smith                    1 1 1 1                      64

Sean Bormet           3 2                                10+12= 22

3                                                                          10

4                                                                           9

Marcus Mollica      1   5  1  4                      16+7+8+4.5=  35.5

6                                                                           6

Joe Williams                7  1  1  1                    4+8+8+8= 28

Dan Wirnsberger        4  8  2                            9+3+6=18

                                                                    AA=192.5

non AA

Jim Pendergrast         6                                     6

Barry Weldon                  _  5  1                         3.5+8=11.5

Tony Robie                     _ 5  2                           3.5+6=9.5

                                                                          27

total 219.5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

top brackets by fadz method

1. 2008 149     233.5

2. 1994 158    219.5

3.  2009 125     218

4. 2015 141    217.5 

5. 2009   157    211

6.  2010 125     208

7. 2013  165      206

8. 2014 125       204

9. 2007 165     203.5

10. 1982 UNL   202.5

11. 2015 197    200

12. 2010 197   194

13. 2001   157    193.5

14. 2018 141  192 and counting

15. 2018 125  191.5 and counting

16. 2019 174     186 and counting

 

Edited by GockeS

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, GockeS said:

top brackets by fadz method

1. 2008 149     233.5

2.  2009 125     228

3. 1994 158    219.5

4. 2015 141    217.5 

5. 2009   157    211

6.  2010 125     208

7. 2013  165      206

8. 2014 125       204

9. 2007 165     203.5

10. 1982 UNL   202.5

11. 2015 197    200

12. 2010 197   194

13. 2001   157    193.5

14. 2018 141  192 and counting

15. 2018 125  191.5 and counting

16. 2019 174     186 and counting

 

wow...thanks for doing that.....lot's of work, you must have a system down????!!!  I/we appreciate it.  We should meet for a beer someday!!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, fadzaev2 said:

wow...thanks for doing that.....lot's of work, you must have a system down????!!!  I/we appreciate it.  We should meet for a beer someday!!!!

I just looked over 2009 125...look it over again...you counted Sentes twice, and I can only find Nicholson placing 2 times, so I get 218.....228-Sentes 8.5, minus 1.5 for Nicholson = minus 10 from 228 =218, and 1994 still is in second place....:).  Fadz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Unfortunately since NCAA’s didn’t happen we can’t update some of the more recent tougher weight classes.
 

@GockeS, would it be worth it to use their seeds to see if any of the recent weights would have a chance to move into the top 5?  174 in 2019 is hurt badly by Zahid but would still improve, and has Myles Amine next year also.  125 in 2018 is looking quite a bit better now and 141 in 2018 probably needs 2 more years for Yianni yet before it moves up much further.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/5/2019 at 1:24 PM, MSU158 said:

Foley last year, wasn't close to Foley this year.  Believe me, I saw a lot of his wrestling up close.  Nic Pic had an unexpected run as a freshman, but regardless of that, his draw exposed his bottom, major weakness losing to Lee by FALL in the quarters and then getting teched by Lizak.

125 was unheralded last year and deserves respect.  But, I still stand firm that it only rivals that 149 class for the 1st 4 or, a slight maybe, 5.  After that, the depth GREATLY favors 149.

Is it possible that maybe the top 6 were decent or does Sebastian Rivera still stink?   There was also a previous finalist that took 8th this year but we won’t even go there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/5/2019 at 1:34 PM, russelscout said:

If we are talking future accomplishments then 149 is unquestionably tougher. I thought we were appeasing to your criteria in this debate. If we are doing that, then 149 had 6 champs and all AA's were finalists. Case closed.

I know the tourney didn’t get wrestled but that cased closed doesn’t seem as closed anymore.  
 

125 in 2018 now has 5 champs with 2 number 1 seeds this year (Lee and Rivera) and then Lee, Rivera and Suriano all have a year remaining.  If they all win titles next year will you concede this weight bracket being tougher than 149 in 2008?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/5/2019 at 6:01 PM, MSU158 said:

And THAT is where the subjective reasoning comes in. And my answer to you is: Because the top 12 wrestlers at 149 were considerably better than their 125 counterparts, which is why I said agree to disagree. 

I’m just curious since you argue that subjectively 149 in 2008 is better.  Objectively then you must agree 125 in 2018 is better in many many (maybe all) metrics right?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Mokoma said:

I’m just curious since you argue that subjectively 149 in 2008 is better.  Objectively then you must agree 125 in 2018 is better in many many (maybe all) metrics right?

 

I still absolutely believe the top 12 in that 149 bracket to be better than 125. However, I agree that the 125 top 6 have a very strong argument and would probably have an even better one if this year didn’t get cancelled. 

As an aside, I added Rivera to make 6 even though I think this year’s version would probably major himself. Since we still used Burroughs it is only fair to include Rivera in a similar way. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, MSU158 said:

I still absolutely believe the top 12 in that 149 bracket to be better than 125. However, I agree that the 125 top 6 have a very strong argument and would probably have an even better one if this year didn’t get cancelled. 

As an aside, I added Rivera to make 6 even though I think this year’s version would probably major himself. Since we still used Burroughs it is only fair to include Rivera in a similar way. 

Yep Burroughs obviously got a lot better after that year and Schlatter clearly wasn’t himself.  
 

Thats kind of my whole point with that bracket.  If looking at entire career, it’s definitely an impressive weight, I just don’t think day of the tourney it’s easily the all time number 1 that so many people are claiming.  
 

It’s too bad this year was lost for Spencer and Rivera because had they both won the title, it stacks up favorably against 149 already and would still have one more year for those two plus Suriano.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Mokoma said:

I’m just curious since you argue that subjectively 149 in 2008 is better.  Objectively then you must agree 125 in 2018 is better in many many (maybe all) metrics right?

 

IMO the simplest way to do it is top career finish.

So 2008 149 is 6 champs + 2 finalists.

Even if you call Rivera a champ and Picc a finalist that’s only 5 champs + 3 finalists for 2018 125.

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, 1032004 said:

IMO the simplest way to do it is top career finish.

So 2008 149 is 6 champs + 2 finalists.

Even if you call Rivera a champ and Picc a finalist that’s only 5 champs + 3 finalists for 2018 125.

 

 

 

 

Why is number of different champions more important than total number of championships again?  If Lee only won 1 title while losing the other years that would then make 2018-125 tougher because more different guys won?  That makes little sense to me, as the same guys were still in the bracket.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, Mokoma said:

Why is number of different champions more important than total number of championships again?  If Lee only won 1 title while losing the other years that would then make 2018-125 tougher because more different guys won?  That makes little sense to me, as the same guys were still in the bracket.

IMO, yes because the toughness is more about the depth to me. The Spencer example is conjecture though for now since in his 2 titles he beat Suriano who was a champ anyway and Mueller who wasn’t in the bracket in 2018.   Besides, in my previous post I was giving credit for 2 scenarios which weren’t even really likely to happen, and even if they did wouldn’t have necessarily made 125 2018 tougher.

Edited by 1032004

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, 1032004 said:

IMO, yes because the toughness is more about the depth to me. The Spencer example is conjecture though for now since in his 2 titles he beat Suriano who was a champ anyway and Mueller who wasn’t in the bracket in 2018.   Besides, in my previous post I was giving credit for 2 scenarios which weren’t even really likely to happen, and even if they did wouldn’t have necessarily made 125 2018 tougher.

But it still affects other brackets.  Like 2019-125 for example.  Is that bracket tougher if Mueller beats Lee in the finals?  Makes no sense to me...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Mokoma said:

But it still affects other brackets.  Like 2019-125 for example.  Is that bracket tougher if Mueller beats Lee in the finals?  Makes no sense to me...

When looking back on it in the future...yes

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Mokoma said:

But it still affects other brackets.  Like 2019-125 for example.  Is that bracket tougher if Mueller beats Lee in the finals?  Makes no sense to me...

I tend to agree with him. Caldwell besting Metcalf a year later made that bracket so much tougher. Metcalf was so dominant that season and even though Caldwell pinned him, Caldwell lost twice to take 5th, Losing to 2 different guys that Metcalf had owned. 

Caldwell winning the following year not only boosted his cred, but those that beat him. 

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...

×
×
  • Create New...