Jump to content
TBar1977

How many guys can beat Marinelli at NCAAs? (not that any of them will)

Recommended Posts

19 minutes ago, VakAttack said:

That's, uh, not how that works.  If one guy wrestles 4 matches against high level opponents and one guy wrestles two, who is more likely to lose?  Discussions about a draw in a tournament format (in any sport) is so commonplace that one would almost assume that you are trolling here.

Isn't the #1 the #1 because they think he can beat everyone so shouldn't matter if he faces 2nd best (or 3rd, 4th ...) in finals, semis, qrt or 1st round.  ;_;

Now the 4 seed has 3 guys who should beat him, and the 8 has ... 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, MSU158 said:

No backtracking at all.  YOU were the one that said Lewis had a tougher draw.  I pointed out how you are wrong.  It isn't about excuses.  He lost and deserved to lose.  I don't think anyone is denying that.  The topic is simply about the draw and the FACTS.  For a 1 seed, Marinelli had a BRUTAL draw that is undeniable.  Still, he didn't win it all.  I just don't like hearing/reading things that INACCURATELY depict his losing at NCAA's as if he is falling on his face!  165 was stacked both years.  It's NOT like he lost to chumps!

Your brutal draw argument is based on Marinelli getting Joe Smith in round 1 and Mekhi Lewis in the quarters, right?  Based on their body of work up to that point, where should Joe Smith and Mekhi Lewis have been seeded in that bracket?  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, ShakaAloha said:

Your brutal draw argument is based on Marinelli getting Joe Smith in round 1 and Mekhi Lewis in the quarters, right?  Based on their body of work up to that point, where should Joe Smith and Mekhi Lewis have been seeded in that bracket?  

Joe Smith?  I would say somewhere between 10-20.  Closer to 10, if I were seeding.  Smith's seeding was all messed up because ALL of the matches he wrestled were at 174 until Big12's.  Common sense didn't come into play.  All of his matches at 174 were ignored and a 4-2 record essentially gave him zero seeding critera., until Big12's. 

Mekhi Lewis at 23-2 should have been a top 5 seed.  He was punished for losing 2 matches in November, while going 15-0 after that.  A 2-0 loss to Isaiah White on November 30th, essentially blocked him from getting a seed higher than 8th.

Also,  having to wrestle Massa just to AA and then Marsteller immediately after that should NOT be ignored........

Share this post


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

Isn't the #1 the #1 because they think he can beat everyone so shouldn't matter if he faces 2nd best (or 3rd, 4th ...) in finals, semis, qrt or 1st round.  ;_;

Now the 4 seed has 3 guys who should beat him, and the 8 has ... 

No, he's the number 1 seed because he has the best overall record and has thus earned the (or should have earned) the easiest path to the finals.  It's a reward for having the best regular season.

Share this post


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

Joe Smith?  I would say somewhere between 10-20.  Closer to 10, if I were seeding.  Smith's seeding was all messed up because ALL of the matches he wrestled were at 174 until Big12's.  Common sense didn't come into play.  All of his matches at 174 were ignored and a 4-2 record essentially gave him zero seeding critera., until Big12's. 

Mekhi Lewis at 23-2 should have been a top 5 seed.  He was punished for losing 2 matches in November, while going 15-0 after that.  A 2-0 loss to Isaiah White on November 30th, essentially blocked him from getting a seed higher than 8th.

Also,  having to wrestle Massa just to AA and then Marsteller immediately after that should NOT be ignored........

The guys Marinelli wrestled in consolations shouldn't count towards his "brutal draw."  You can't control upsets and who goes to the backside.  

With that being said, Shields from ASU was way too high at #3.  I probably would have moved Shields down to #8 and everyone else up 1.  Under this hypo, if Mekhi beat Cenzo in the quarters, I think Cenzo would have come back and won third, which is better than what Marinelli did after he lost to Mekhi.  

I agree that Joe Smith was way too low at #32.  I would have had him as #12 because you can't put him above all the guys that placed higher than him in Big 12's like Romero, Ashworth, and Steiert.  

Share this post


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

Joe Smith?  I would say somewhere between 10-20.  Closer to 10, if I were seeding.  Smith's seeding was all messed up because ALL of the matches he wrestled were at 174 until Big12's.  Common sense didn't come into play.  All of his matches at 174 were ignored and a 4-2 record essentially gave him zero seeding critera., until Big12's. 

Mekhi Lewis at 23-2 should have been a top 5 seed.  He was punished for losing 2 matches in November, while going 15-0 after that.  A 2-0 loss to Isaiah White on November 30th, essentially blocked him from getting a seed higher than 8th.

Also,  having to wrestle Massa just to AA and then Marsteller immediately after that should NOT be ignored........

Mekhi's best win was the 10 seed (Ashworth), with losses to 15 (Flynn) and the 7 (White).  He was 15-0 after that, but only wrestled guys seeded 16 or lower.  I think the 8 seed was pretty fair, but of course he looks like a really tough draw in retrospect.  

IMO, Marinelli deservedly carries the stigma of underperforming at NCAAs.  He's been there twice, lost to lower-seeded guys each time (including Wick who he usually beat) and finished below his seed.  That's the problem with being so good in the regular season, you get high seeds and it's pretty tough to match or exceed them (Alan Waters was a good example for Mizzou).  The good news is that Marinelli has a couple more chances to drop that label.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, XiXiTiger said:

Mekhi's best win was the 10 seed (Ashworth), with losses to 15 (Flynn) and the 7 (White).  He was 15-0 after that, but only wrestled guys seeded 16 or lower.  I think the 8 seed was pretty fair, but of course he looks like a really tough draw in retrospect.  

IMO, Marinelli deservedly carries the stigma of underperforming at NCAAs.  He's been there twice, lost to lower-seeded guys each time (including Wick who he usually beat) and finished below his seed.  That's the problem with being so good in the regular season, you get high seeds and it's pretty tough to match or exceed them (Alan Waters was a good example for Mizzou).  The good news is that Marinelli has a couple more chances to drop that label.

Look, I get why he was seeded 8th.  I just don't agree that he SHOULD have been seeded 8th.

As far as underperforming goes, to me, it mandates losing to lesser wrestlers.  As a freshman, he lost to the top 2 seeds(IMAR and McFadden) and the 10 seed (Wick) who absolutely lit himself on fire and was a terrible matchup for Alex, having not wrestled him before.  I just don't see any underperforming that season.

As far as last year goes, I get knocking him for being the #1 seed and taking 7th.  But, the 2 guys he lost 2 placed as high as your opponents possibly could if you took 7th.  Lewis looked like an absolute beast and Marinelli was his toughest match, by far.  Marsteller made one blunder against Wick and avenged that loss.  He was a style NIGHTMARE for Alex.

Instead of underperforming I simply believe 165 was full of landmines both years and if you re-wrestled that bracket 10 times the AA's would all be interchangeable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, VakAttack said:

No, he's the number 1 seed because he has the best overall record and has thus earned the (or should have earned) the easiest path to the finals.  It's a reward for having the best regular season.

He did have the easiest path. The 32, then the 16, the 8 ... and so on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, VakAttack said:

Keep being purposely obtuse.  It's a good look.

Its just the fact of the matter. No matter how you slice it the whole "bad draw" mantra is an excuse.

Greg Jones' fans (myself among them) don't show up making excuses for his 0-2 that year. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The bulletin board chatter at the time was that it was a terrible draw.  Joe Smith woefully underseeded, and Mekhi was the defending Junior World champ.  There were questions about Mekhi, due to the two losses, but the scuttlebutt was that wrestling someone with that type of ceiling was a rough quarter for the #1 seed.

Share this post


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

The bulletin board chatter at the time was that it was a terrible draw.  Joe Smith woefully underseeded, and Mekhi was the defending Junior World champ.  There were questions about Mekhi, due to the two losses, but the scuttlebutt was that wrestling someone with that type of ceiling was a rough quarter for the #1 seed.

Agreed. We didn't come to this conclusion after it happened. We had a week +/- to talk about it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe there should be a new tournament rule that allows the #1 seed (and only the 1) after viewing the brackets to swap spots with anyone from #5 on down (2, 3, 4 can't be touched) cause it just ain't fair for the #1 to get a "bad draw."  ;_;  If he had that option, who would Marinelli have swaped with?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, ionel said:

Maybe there should be a new tournament rule that allows the #1 seed (and only the 1) after viewing the brackets to swap spots with anyone from #5 on down (2, 3, 4 can't be touched) cause it just ain't fair for the #1 to get a "bad draw."  ;_;  If he had that option, who would Marinelli have swaped with?

You beat the hell out of that big straw man, sir.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm not so sure Marinelli will win the B1G Conference Tournament.
In fact, I'll go on record to say he won't.
Presuming he competes, who do you have him losing to? Not exactly loaded within the conference at this weight.

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Contrary to popular belief, I think that 165 will be closely contested. Maybe only 133 or 141 in the same league for potential B1G upsets.

We still have a bit of time before I could project actual bracket results. There will be time for that, I'm in no hurry.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Contrary to popular belief, I think that 165 will be closely contested. Maybe only 133 or 141 in the same league for potential B1G upsets.
We still have a bit of time before I could project actual bracket results. There will be time for that, I'm in no hurry.
Sure. We'll see I guess.i don't see Marinelli being threatened in the conference.

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/24/2021 at 11:08 AM, TBar1977 said:

 

 

I am just trying to figure out if there is any possible way for Iowa to drop the ball at NCAAs and what it would take. Probably a total fools errand because Iowa is THAT good. 

You'd better believe there's ways. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This thread is a beaut.

how can some of you not differentiate between a bad draw and the numbers next to people's names?

In the entire history of the NCAA tournament, there HAS to be a "Worst Draw For A #1 Seed".

Marinelli's is in that conversation. It's simply not debatable. 

(and before you rant...no one is saying that Marinelli (or any #1) shouldn't win or be favored in every match when they are a #1. what we are saying is that their string of matches offers a higher level of competition in comparison to most #1 seeds).

i can't for the life of me understand why this is a difficult concept. 

Share this post


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

This thread is a beaut.

how can some of you not differentiate between a bad draw and the numbers next to people's names?

In the entire history of the NCAA tournament, there HAS to be a "Worst Draw For A #1 Seed".

Marinelli's is in that conversation. It's simply not debatable. 

(and before you rant...no one is saying that Marinelli (or any #1) shouldn't win or be favored in every match when they are a #1. what we are saying is that their string of matches offers a higher level of competition in comparison to most #1 seeds).

i can't for the life of me understand why this is a difficult concept. 

The issue is yes it was a tough draw but it doesn’t really even compare to some other draws like Dustin Schlatter path as the 1 ...he faced JB in the round of 32, 2x AA Matt Moley in the R16, Tyler turner who place 6th In quarters , Gregor Gillespie in semis (4x AA and ncaa champ )then josh curella in the finals...

compare that path to marniellis and it’s not even a contest, and I’m sure with minimum research you can find multiple other tougher brackets  then marnelli path 

Iowa fans stay making excuses  and pretending the world is against them every time someone on their team underperforms. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

that's a good response. i'm sure there are some that surpass/come close to Marinelli's draw. 

but it IS, imo, a thing. there aren't many #1's that open up with a former AA. 

and by definition there has to be a short list of draws of the course of ncaa history where some #1's had tougher paths than other #1's.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Husker_Du said:

that's a good response. i'm sure there are some that surpass/come close to Marinelli's draw. 

but it IS, imo, a thing. there aren't many #1's that open up with a former AA. 

and by definition there has to be a short list of draws of the course of ncaa history where some #1's had tougher paths than other #1's.

Of course there can be a tough draw, but its the continual excuse making that grates. Like I said above, you don't see anyone coming in here making excuses for Greg Jones 0-2. 

Edited by TBar1977

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...