Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
brianj

Hodge

Recommended Posts

Ok...but that isn't what I was responding to. You said Stieber didn't wrestle enough...sure he did.

 

And again - strength of competition is just one of 7 criteria - and the 5 one at that.

 

I just don't see the Hodge as a guy who wrestled 27 matches, especially since he missed some of his biggest opposition during that injury as well (matches with Graff and Ramos @Iowa), so that bolsters his pin %.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok...but that isn't what I was responding to. You said Stieber didn't wrestle enough...sure he did.

 

And again - strength of competition is just one of 7 criteria - and the 5 one at that.

 

I just don't see the Hodge as a guy who wrestled 27 matches, especially since he missed some of his biggest opposition during that injury as well (matches with Graff and Ramos), so that bolsters his pin %.

 

It doesn't matter if you think that 27 matches isn't enough - literally it does not matter one bit.

 

It is becoming clear that you don't understand the criteria - so it is a good thing you are not on the voting board for the award.

 

The Hodge isnt a "most dominant award" - it isnt a "toughest competition award" - it isnt a "who wrestled the most matches" award - it is a commemorative award based on 7 criteria - of which the things you are citing are only 2. It is not that hard to understand.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ruth was the most dominant.

 

No one had a shot of beating him all year. He was the best college wrestler in 2013.

And he definitely provided the best comments in his interviews!

 

This killed me so bad.

 

"I looked over at the coaches and (they) were just saying, 'Cut him. Cut him.' I was like, 'Oh wow, he must be going for a major then," Ruth said.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok...but that isn't what I was responding to. You said Stieber didn't wrestle enough...sure he did.

 

And again - strength of competition is just one of 7 criteria - and the 5 one at that.

 

I just don't see the Hodge as a guy who wrestled 27 matches, especially since he missed some of his biggest opposition during that injury as well (matches with Graff and Ramos), so that bolsters his pin %.

 

It doesn't matter if you think that 27 matches isn't enough - literally it does not matter one bit.

 

It is becoming clear that you don't understand the criteria - so it is a good thing you are not on the voting board for the award.

 

The Hodge isnt a "most dominant award" - it isnt a "toughest competition award" - it isnt a "who wrestled the most matches" award - it is a commemorative award based on 7 criteria - of which the things you are citing are only 2. It is not that hard to understand.

 

So you don't think that him missing duals against Wisconsin and @ Iowa have anything to do with his higher pin %/ have nothing to do with him winning the Hodge? Him not wrestling those matches kills criteria 1, and 5 for him. It also highly bolsters criteria 2 and 3. I think he could have won the Hodge if he wrestled the whole year, but he didn't. If you really want to get into criteria, I think Ruth has him on 1, 4, 5, 6, and 7. Sorry if you don't like my opinion. You're entitled to yours. It is a moot point since Dake is the Hodge winner this year most likely.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

So you don't think that him missing duals against Wisconsin and @ Iowa have anything to do with his higher pin %/ have nothing to do with him winning the Hodge? Him not wrestling those matches kills criteria 1, and 5 for him. I think he could have won the Hodge if he wrestled the whole year, but he didn't. If you really want to get into criteria, I think Ruth has him on 1, 4, 5, 6, and 7. Sorry if you don't like my opinion. You're entitled to yours. It is a moot point since Dake is the Hodge winner this year most likely.

 

Him missing the Wisc and Iowa duals changes nothing, at all. Do you think he loses to Graff or Ramos? No. Him not wrestling these matches kills criteria 1 and 5? What are you even talking about? He was still undefeated, and he still wrestled Ramos - and injury doesn't change things.

 

Ill say it again, you obviously don't understand the criteria. Ruth has him on 1, 4, 5 ,6, and 7? WHAT ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT!?

 

1. Record - Ruth doesn't have him beat - they are both undefeated - its a tie.

 

4. Past Credentials - I already explained this to you - Stieber is 2 for 2 in terms of National titles - Ruth has a 3rd place finish. No matter how much you want this for Ruth - it goes to Stieber. (at best its a tie)

5. Quality of Competition - Give this to Ruth.

6. Sportsmanship/citizenship - What gives this to Ruth? Stieber is known as one of the nicest kids around.

7. Heart - Same here...why Ruth over him now?

 

You are trying soo hard to turn the criteria for Ruth so he gets more of them - but you are wrong, and that is not how it works.

 

The criteria are weighted - it is not who has more wins.

 

Finally, Dake should win - I want to mention that again. But Ruth shouldn't get it over Stieber - close but no. There are ways to argue that he should... but the arguments you choose to support Ruth over Stieber are just nonsensical.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

So you don't think that him missing duals against Wisconsin and @ Iowa have anything to do with his higher pin %/ have nothing to do with him winning the Hodge? Him not wrestling those matches kills criteria 1, and 5 for him. I think he could have won the Hodge if he wrestled the whole year, but he didn't. If you really want to get into criteria, I think Ruth has him on 1, 4, 5, 6, and 7. Sorry if you don't like my opinion. You're entitled to yours. It is a moot point since Dake is the Hodge winner this year most likely.

 

Him missing the Wisc and Iowa duals changes nothing, at all. Do you think he loses to Graff or Ramos? No. Him not wrestling these matches kills criteria 1 and 5? What are you even talking about? He was still undefeated, and he still wrestled Ramos - and injury doesn't change things.

 

Ill say it again, you obviously don't understand the criteria. Ruth has him on 1, 4, 5 ,6, and 7? WHAT ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT!?

 

1. Record - Ruth doesn't have him beat - they are both undefeated - its a tie.

 

4. Past Credentials - I already explained this to you - Stieber is 2 for 2 in terms of National titles - Ruth has a 3rd place finish. No matter how much you want this for Ruth - it goes to Stieber. (at best its a tie)

5. Quality of Competition - Give this to Ruth.

6. Sportsmanship/citizenship - What gives this to Ruth? Stieber is known as one of the nicest kids around.

7. Heart - Same here...why Ruth over him now?

 

You are trying soo hard to turn the criteria for Ruth so he gets more of them - but you are wrong, and that is not how it works.

 

The criteria are weighted - it is not who has more wins.

 

Finally, Dake should win - I want to mention that again. But Ruth shouldn't get it over Stieber - close but no. There are ways to argue that he should... but the arguments you choose to support Ruth over Stieber are just nonsensical.

 

His pin % and dominance (I say pin % because it was your original argument) go up when he misses the dual meet against the clear #2 and #3 guys. I think that is pretty obvious. You make good points though. I thought # of wins was part of record if everyone was undefeated. You are right though, probably Logan over Ruth with the criteria in place. 5 should be much higher though. The highest AA Stieber beat during the regular season was McCormick, who finished 8th. Other than that, he beat a few seeded wrestlers who didn't AA. His quality of competition was very weak this year. Who cares who you are dominating when it isn't high competition (aside from a few matches)?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

His pin % and dominance go up when he misses the dual meet against the clear #2 and #3 guys. I think that is pretty obvious. You make good points though. I thought # of wins was part of record if everyone was undefeated. You are right though, probably Logan over Ruth with the criteria in place. 5 should be much higher though. The highest AA Stieber beat during the regular season was McCormick, who finished 8th. Other than that, he beat a few seeded wrestlers who didn't AA. His quality of competition was very weak this year.

 

 

Another thing you may not know, or at least seem not to, is that the NCAA tournament counts as well.

 

Stieber beat two of the AAs (&th and 4th) in his bracket by tech fall on his way to the finals...where he beat Ramos - who beat Graff twice - again. It is not as if he doesn't just destroy AA quality opponents - he does.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

His pin % and dominance go up when he misses the dual meet against the clear #2 and #3 guys. I think that is pretty obvious. You make good points though. I thought # of wins was part of record if everyone was undefeated. You are right though, probably Logan over Ruth with the criteria in place. 5 should be much higher though. The highest AA Stieber beat during the regular season was McCormick, who finished 8th. Other than that, he beat a few seeded wrestlers who didn't AA. His quality of competition was very weak this year.

 

 

Another thing you may not know, or at least seem not to, is that the NCAA tournament counts as well.

 

Stieber beat two of the AAs (&th and 4th) in his bracket by tech fall on his way to the finals...where he beat Ramos - who beat Graff twice - again. It is not as if he doesn't just destroy AA quality opponents - he does.

 

What's up with the insults? Not necessary in a debate, and although you are making great points, it doesn't make your argument any better. I was saying his regular season competition was pretty easy, which is true. Sorry to ruffle your feathers. You are correct, Ruth is probably a close 3rd behind Stieber.

 

You obviously know Hodge criteria better than me. No need to jam it down my throat.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

What's up with the insults? Not necessary in a debate, and although you are making great points, it doesn't make your argument any better. I was saying his regular season competition was pretty easy, which is true. Sorry to ruffle your feathers. You are correct, Ruth is probably a close 3rd behind Stieber.

 

Not meant as an insult at all - I don't do that on here unprovoked. If it came off that way I apologize.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

What's up with the insults? Not necessary in a debate, and although you are making great points, it doesn't make your argument any better. I was saying his regular season competition was pretty easy, which is true. Sorry to ruffle your feathers. You are correct, Ruth is probably a close 3rd behind Stieber.

 

Not meant as an insult at all - I don't do that on here unprovoked. If it came off that way I apologize.

 

No problem. Great way to join a new forum, to just get ripped on your knowledge, or lack thereof. For that, I thank you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I thought Hodge was based off stats?

 

Who has the most bonus wins without a loss?

 

You are over-simplifying.

 

Criteria:

1. Record

2. Number of pins

3. Dominance

4. Past credentials

5. Quality of competition

6. Sportsmanship/citizenship

7. Heart

 

You missed the most important one, popularity contest.

 

Who will be given the hodge this time around? Look for a guy with a squeaker in the final, who may have been pinned during the season, and was outperformed in # of pins by at least one of this years National champions. He who fits that criteria, will be receive the hodge award.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

So you don't think that him missing duals against Wisconsin and @ Iowa have anything to do with his higher pin %/ have nothing to do with him winning the Hodge? Him not wrestling those matches kills criteria 1, and 5 for him. I think he could have won the Hodge if he wrestled the whole year, but he didn't. If you really want to get into criteria, I think Ruth has him on 1, 4, 5, 6, and 7. Sorry if you don't like my opinion. You're entitled to yours. It is a moot point since Dake is the Hodge winner this year most likely.

 

Him missing the Wisc and Iowa duals changes nothing, at all. Do you think he loses to Graff or Ramos? No. Him not wrestling these matches kills criteria 1 and 5? What are you even talking about? He was still undefeated, and he still wrestled Ramos - and injury doesn't change things.

 

Ill say it again, you obviously don't understand the criteria. Ruth has him on 1, 4, 5 ,6, and 7? WHAT ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT!?

 

1. Record - Ruth doesn't have him beat - they are both undefeated - its a tie.

 

4. Past Credentials - I already explained this to you - Stieber is 2 for 2 in terms of National titles - Ruth has a 3rd place finish. No matter how much you want this for Ruth - it goes to Stieber. (at best its a tie)

5. Quality of Competition - Give this to Ruth.

6. Sportsmanship/citizenship - What gives this to Ruth? Stieber is known as one of the nicest kids around.

7. Heart - Same here...why Ruth over him now?

 

You are trying soo hard to turn the criteria for Ruth so he gets more of them - but you are wrong, and that is not how it works.

 

The criteria are weighted - it is not who has more wins.

 

Finally, Dake should win - I want to mention that again. But Ruth shouldn't get it over Stieber - close but no. There are ways to argue that he should... but the arguments you choose to support Ruth over Stieber are just nonsensical.

 

How does Ruth not have Stieber beat on record? Ruth has 7 more victories than Stieber this season...including those in the NCAA tournament. I mean, what's next? Your going to say the regular season and NCAA tournament are taken separately and because Stieber had 2 pins and 2 TF he's the higher of the 2 because Ruth had 2 pins and 2 MDs? Well my counter to that is Ruth's NCAA finals performances BOTH years were dominating and far superior to Stieber's. Stieber had to eke out his titles both years...last year with an extremely generous non-call 4-3 (against an NCAA champ) and 7-4. Last year Ruth won his title by dominating a higher ranked guy (Amuchastegui) 13-2 and this year a 4 time AA (Hamlin) 12-4...after beating the returning NCAA champ in the semis. Objective observers know it ain't the 133er.

 

The truth is the Hodge Trophy is a WIN Magazine award. They don't even have the criteria published. Its documented in Wikipedia for goodness sakes. Unless you work for WIN magazine and sit in the room during the process, you have absolutely no idea what "Record" means. The point is whoever they want to win will win...and it should be Dake.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How does Ruth not have Stieber beat on record? Ruth has 7 more victories than Stieber this season...including those in the NCAA tournament. I mean, what's next? Your going to say the regular season and NCAA tournament are taken separately and because Stieber had 2 pins and 2 TF he's the higher of the 2 because Ruth had 2 pins and 2 MDs? Well my counter to that is Ruth's NCAA finals performances BOTH years were dominating and far superior to Stieber's. Stieber had to eke out his titles both years...last year with an extremely generous non-call 4-3 (against an NCAA champ) and 7-4. Last year Ruth won his title by dominating a higher ranked guy (Amuchastegui) 13-2 and this year a 4 time AA (Hamlin) 12-4...after beating the returning NCAA champ in the semis. Objective observers know it ain't the 133er.

 

Unless you work for WIN magazine and sit in the room during the process, you have absolutely no idea what "Record" means.

 

You arn't serious, are you?

 

They were both undefeated - # of victories is not a tie breaker when two wrestlers are undefeated - they are both just undefeated. Because Ruth wrestled more matches since Stieber was injured - he is not "more undefeated" than Stieber. They are both undefeated National Champions, period. Their records are a wash. It is very, very simple.

 

As for your rant you just went on about Ruth in the finals and Stieber having close matches, and techs and pins vs majors and blah blah (i got lost in your nonsensical ranting) - talking to yourself is just weird, so stop it.

 

My favorite part of your post is the last part. I have no idea what "record" means since I don't work for WIN - but you sure do! They way to differentiate who was "more undefeated" is by who's team schedule had more matches on it, obviously! :roll:

 

Finally, yes I think Dake should get it and he deserves it according to the criteria. That is besides the point, we were talking specifically about Ruth vs. Stieber.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Every year we have this same silly discussion:

 

The guidelines are clear - and they are NOT necessarily carved in stone. Each year 'unanticipated factors' will come into play. They will change from year to year. It's not "criteria" like it is in a tie-breaker in a team wrestling match... it's a "guideline" that is to be interpreted by those that are empowered to decide.

 

You MAY think you have a better interpretation, or a better choice. You may or may not be right. But at least try to understand what the system is and how it works before you post.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How does Ruth not have Stieber beat on record? Ruth has 7 more victories than Stieber this season...including those in the NCAA tournament. I mean, what's next? Your going to say the regular season and NCAA tournament are taken separately and because Stieber had 2 pins and 2 TF he's the higher of the 2 because Ruth had 2 pins and 2 MDs? Well my counter to that is Ruth's NCAA finals performances BOTH years were dominating and far superior to Stieber's. Stieber had to eke out his titles both years...last year with an extremely generous non-call 4-3 (against an NCAA champ) and 7-4. Last year Ruth won his title by dominating a higher ranked guy (Amuchastegui) 13-2 and this year a 4 time AA (Hamlin) 12-4...after beating the returning NCAA champ in the semis. Objective observers know it ain't the 133er.

 

Unless you work for WIN magazine and sit in the room during the process, you have absolutely no idea what "Record" means.

 

You arn't serious, are you?

 

They were both undefeated - # of victories is not a tie breaker when two wrestlers are undefeated - they are both just undefeated. Because Ruth wrestled more matches since Stieber was injured - he is not "more undefeated" than Stieber. They are both undefeated National Champions, period. Their records are a wash. It is very, very simple.

 

As for your rant you just went on about Ruth in the finals and Stieber having close matches, and techs and pins vs majors and blah blah (i got lost in your nonsensical ranting) - talking to yourself is just weird, so stop it.

 

My favorite part of your post is the last part. I have no idea what "record" means since I don't work for WIN - but you sure do! They way to differentiate who was "more undefeated" is by who's team schedule had more matches on it, obviously! :roll:

 

Finally, yes I think Dake should get it and he deserves it according to the criteria. That is besides the point, we were talking specifically about Ruth vs. Stieber.

 

Listen, I don't know what "record" means any more than you do. That's the point. This vaunted criteria you seem to wield like a hammer changes every year based on situations on the ground. They use them as guidelines. That makes my opinion just as valid as yours.

 

And...what follows is my opinion. But, it is based in simple math concepts that anyone can understand. You state Ruth can't be "more undefeated" than Stieber. I say he can. Ask any 3rd grader and they will tell you that 38 is greater than 31. Talk about nonsensical rantings...since when is 38 not greater than 31?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Every year we have this same silly discussion:

 

The guidelines are clear - and they are NOT necessarily carved in stone. Each year 'unanticipated factors' will come into play. They will change from year to year. It's not "criteria" like it is in a tie-breaker in a team wrestling match... it's a "guideline" that is to be interpreted by those that are empowered to decide.

 

You MAY think you have a better interpretation, or a better choice. You may or may not be right. But at least try to understand what the system is and how it works before you post.

+ 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A good case could be made for Ruth. No one came close to him. Taylor came very close to Dake.

 

But Dake will win imo, and I have no objection to that. If looking over whole career is part of the criteria, Dake picks up votes. Add to that, he's a sr with no chance to ever win again. Sort of like the Oscars, it might make him a sentimental favorite.

 

So Dake will win, but what a year. In most any other year, Ruth's accomplishments, and even Steiber's for that matter, would've made them worth winners.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When did I say 38 isn't greater than 31? Sure it is. But you cant take that fact and turn it into 38-0 with an NCAA title is "more undefeated" than 31-0 with an NCAA title - that is just ridiculous.

 

Opinions are opinions...but this is common sense - and is about as easy a concept to understand as 38 > 31 is for a 3rd grader. In terms of "Record" as a criteria for an award...if there is a 0 at the back end, and you didn't do something ridiculous like wrestle two matches and stop at 2-0, undefeated Nation Champion = undefeated Nation Champion, period.

 

Since you do think that someone can be "more undefeated" than someone else...im just going to bow out of this conversations now after this thought.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Every year we have this same silly discussion:

 

The guidelines are clear - and they are NOT necessarily carved in stone. Each year 'unanticipated factors' will come into play. They will change from year to year. It's not "criteria" like it is in a tie-breaker in a team wrestling match... it's a "guideline" that is to be interpreted by those that are empowered to decide.

 

You MAY think you have a better interpretation, or a better choice. You may or may not be right. But at least try to understand what the system is and how it works before you post.

-----

 

Yes, it's not precise, like breaking a tie in team wrestling. Or like in FS, where there are well defined guidelines - one guy grabs a colored ball out of a bag followed by false starts, varying arm positions and inconsistent ref'ing. ;)

 

Couldn't resist. But your point about subjectivity in Hodge selection is true.

 

That said, hard to imagine Dake not winning.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The WIN Magazine staff won't be selecting the Hodge Trophy winner this year. They've got ASICS on board as a sponsor and have developed a new process.

We have also developed a new process of selecting the award similar to the way the Heisman Trophy balloting is handled. We are putting together a panel of more than 40 wrestling media members, past collegiate coaches from the different parts of the country, wrestling dignitaries and all past Hodge winners. Each will submit a vote after the NCAAs are complete on their choice for the winner.

The winner will be announced Thursday.

 

http://www.win-magazine.com/2013/03/asics-becomes-presenting-sponsor-of-the-dan-hodge-trophy/

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...