Jump to content
jerseychas

Where's BIG10 brackets?

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, uncle bernard said:

Willie too. If we're strictly basing it only on this year's results, I think that's the right spot. Ironically, it's a better spot for Kerk because he basically takes over the 4 seed.

He has no bad spot. He IS the bad spot. 

Share this post


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

Willie too. If we're strictly basing it only on this year's results, I think that's the right spot. Ironically, it's a better spot for Kerk because he basically takes over the 4 seed.

Ironically, they argued that Kerk should be the 13 based on just this year's results and Rivera should be the 1 based on just previous year's results.

We all have our inconsistencies, it is only yours that bother me though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Wrestleknownothing said:

Ironically, they argued that Kerk should be the 13 based on just this year's results and Rivera should be the 1 based on just previous year's results.

We all have our inconsistencies, it is only yours that bother me though.

Well I strongly disagree with Rivera as a top seed/top ranked, so don't put that on me. There's a reason the flo guys were the only ones who have had him there all year. They're in love with the kid.

The situation is weird. There are two ways you could think about seeding: based on results or based on how good you think they are. If it's only based on results, you put him at the 12 (I didn't realize the 11 seed Colucci doesn't have a win this year, so he should be 13). If on how good you think they are, he should be the 3 or 4. It's clear they basically split the difference.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, uncle bernard said:

Well I strongly disagree with Rivera as a top seed/top ranked, so don't put that on me. There's a reason the flo guys were the only ones who have had him there all year. They're in love with the kid.

The situation is weird. There are two ways you could think about seeding: based on results or based on how good you think they are. If it's only based on results, you put him at the 12 (I didn't realize the 11 seed Colucci doesn't have a win this year, so he should be 13). If on how good you think they are, he should be the 3 or 4. It's clear they basically split the difference.

I meant the royal you

Share this post


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

I thought he said they were mostly good? The only one he really disagreed with was Kerk, who he thinks should be the 13. I agree personally, though that's unpopular on this forum.

Yeah I saw he said that on Twitter after I posted that, I dunno on FRL he seemed more upset.

I probably would have put Kerk at 8, but  13 is a joke IMO.  After Orndorff the rest of the guys are pretty bad.

Honestly the most egregious seed was probably Kemerer over Labriola.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/2/2021 at 12:20 PM, nhs67 said:

I make no assumptions.  It is clear he didn't expect RBY to handle him so easily so he gave up.  He cracked.  He couldn't handle the pressure. Much like he did against Micic, Delvecchio, Gross, Mueller twelve times...

What does your word mean? Less than nothing.  It was plainly obvious what happened.  When he gets punched in the mouth again qnd cracks again, maybe he'll fake a spinal injury or something this time.  He always needs to one up his last flop.

 

On 3/2/2021 at 1:32 PM, TBar1977 said:

He must be a very quick healer. 

Wait, are you both honestly Desanto injury truthers??? Come on. He missed 2 weeks of competition and wore a brace the rest of the year. Just for fun apparently?

The insecurity of Penn State fans is astounding. It's not enough that RBY beat him. There has to be some conspiracy that Desanto faked an injury for some reason, something he's never done before or since.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I always find it funny reading you guys yammer...because its anonymous, you dont know who the poster is but you would think that all of you are returning NCAA AA’s...”most of these guys are pretty bad”...these are Big Ten wrestlers...are they really “bad”...again, I dont know the credentials of the posters but when so many cant figure out a basic twelve man bracket based on preseeds or dont know how the seeding criteria when critiquing, it makes me wonder.  before all of you start screaming, I recognize some of you had good careers and dont fall into my overview but man it would be interesting to see how much humility would creep in if the posters had to post their credentials before letting it rip. best time of the year, enjoy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, CJE64 said:

I always find it funny reading you guys yammer...because its anonymous, you dont know who the poster is but you would think that all of you are returning NCAA AA’s...”most of these guys are pretty bad”...these are Big Ten wrestlers...are they really “bad”...again, I dont know the credentials of the posters but when so many cant figure out a basic twelve man bracket based on preseeds or dont know how the seeding criteria when critiquing, it makes me wonder.  before all of you start screaming, I recognize some of you had good careers and dont fall into my overview but man it would be interesting to see how much humility would creep in if the posters had to post their credentials before letting it rip. best time of the year, enjoy.

I guess you can't figure out the seeding criteria either because there is none for B10's...

"Bad" is relative of course.   I think everyone that posts here knows that 95% or more of the people wrestling D1 are more accomplished wrestlers than 95% or more of the posters here including myself.  Same way people would say Carson Wentz was a bad QB last year.   Obviously he's better than any of the fans saying that, but for the role he was in, he was bad.

I guess you could argue Rebottaro and Colucci aren't "bad" as they have winning records for their career, but getting back to the argument of if they should be seeded over Kerk, if everyone is so focused on this year, Colucci is 0-2, and Rebottaro's only win is against Streck who has a career record of 8-35. Heyob is 12-29 for his career.   Keys and Kappes are true freshmen which isn't easy at HWT (although not sure we want to get into the whole do many heavyweights actually have much skill debate...), Kappes is winless and Keys' 2 wins this year have come against backups.   Kerk's win over Fernandes last year was arguably a better win than any of them have had.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, uncle bernard said:

 

Wait, are you both honestly Desanto injury truthers??? Come on. He missed 2 weeks of competition and wore a brace the rest of the year. Just for fun apparently?

The insecurity of Penn State fans is astounding. It's not enough that RBY beat him. There has to be some conspiracy that Desanto faked an injury for some reason, something he's never done before or since.

There you go assuming.

Also, he has flopped/broke/cracked before.  On many occasions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, uncle bernard said:

Well I strongly disagree with Rivera as a top seed/top ranked, so don't put that on me. There's a reason the flo guys were the only ones who have had him there all year. They're in love with the kid.

The situation is weird. There are two ways you could think about seeding: based on results or based on how good you think they are. If it's only based on results, you put him at the 12 (I didn't realize the 11 seed Colucci doesn't have a win this year, so he should be 13). If on how good you think they are, he should be the 3 or 4. It's clear they basically split the difference.

I do think that some respect should be paid to the two time defending B1G Champ.  Eierman has never been in a B1G tournament grind, which many B1G wrestlers and coaches have said is tougher than NCAAs, which also seems to not be taken into consideration.

I wouldn't be surprised to see them reseed any of the weights, although I am okay with how every one was preseeded, save for heavyweight.  You can't just give Kerk Nevill's wins, which is what it appears they did.  That said, I believe he is absolutely in that Top 3 tier, and if preseeds hold we will get to see one of the matches we have all been clamoring about very early.  I am okay with that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, CJE64 said:

I always find it funny reading you guys yammer...because its anonymous, you dont know who the poster is but you would think that all of you are returning NCAA AA’s...”most of these guys are pretty bad”...these are Big Ten wrestlers...are they really “bad”...again, I dont know the credentials of the posters but when so many cant figure out a basic twelve man bracket based on preseeds or dont know how the seeding criteria when critiquing, it makes me wonder.  before all of you start screaming, I recognize some of you had good careers and dont fall into my overview but man it would be interesting to see how much humility would creep in if the posters had to post their credentials before letting it rip. best time of the year, enjoy.

Me saying Jordan>Lebron doesn’t mean I think I could beat Lebron (I would’ve been able to in my prime, but I have bad knees now)

Share this post


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

I guess you can't figure out the seeding criteria either because there is none for B10's...

"Bad" is relative of course.   I think everyone that posts here knows that 95% or more of the people wrestling D1 are more accomplished wrestlers than 95% or more of the posters here including myself.  Same way people would say Carson Wentz was a bad QB last year.   Obviously he's better than any of the fans saying that, but for the role he was in, he was bad.

I guess you could argue Rebottaro and Colucci aren't "bad" as they have winning records for their career, but getting back to the argument of if they should be seeded over Kerk, if everyone is so focused on this year, Colucci is 0-2, and Rebottaro's only win is against Streck who has a career record of 8-35. Heyob is 12-29 for his career.   Keys and Kappes are true freshmen which isn't easy at HWT (although not sure we want to get into the whole do many heavyweights actually have much skill debate...), Kappes is winless and Keys' 2 wins this year have come against backups.   Kerk's win over Fernandes last year was arguably a better win than any of them have had.

 

Reboterro and colucci are bad. The implication is compared to their peers. Both of them could beat the living hell out of me, but I can still call them bad because they are bad. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Wrestleknownothing said:

Ironically, they argued that Kerk should be the 13 based on just this year's results and Rivera should be the 1 based on just previous year's results.

We all have our inconsistencies, it is only yours that bother me though.

For Rivera, the argument is if you use prior seasons results, which is what they are clearly doing (for good reason), then Rivera’s performances at prior Big10s should be counted. Him being at a lower weight, which was actually much tougher, shouldn’t be overridden by someone just because they had success at a higher weight. 
  
I don’t actually agree Rivera should be one, but I get what Christian was saying. 
  
keep in mind there are no criteria for this, so they just need to be consistent within the current year. I think they did that, given that Kerklevit is clearly being given credit for his year last year

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, Housebuye said:

For Rivera, the argument is if you use prior seasons results, which is what they are clearly doing (for good reason), then Rivera’s performances at prior Big10s should be counted. Him being at a lower weight, which was actually much tougher, shouldn’t be overridden by someone just because they had success at a higher weight. 
  
I don’t actually agree Rivera should be one, but I get what Christian was saying. 
  
keep in mind there are no criteria for this, so they just need to be consistent within the current year. I think they did that, given that Kerklevit is clearly being given credit for his year last year

I hear ya.

Kerk's best win last season was Hoffman though...

Share this post


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

@nhs67 I haven't, "clamored" for years. I need to get back into that.

Kerk doesn't deserve the seven, but is better than the four...

GO BUCKS!

I clamor hourly.  Often times more frequently.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, Mphillips said:

I hear ya.

Kerk's best win last season was Hoffman though...

Fernandes (who beat Slavikouski from Harvard that was seeded 10th at NCAA’s). Pelusi of F&M was probably a better win than Hoffman too, he had 20 wins including over 2x NQ Andrew Gunning of UNC.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But anyone that’s mad about Kerk’s seed should be even more mad that Illinois entered a backup at 149 that hasn’t wrestled a dual this year and is 2-3 in extra matches (and didn’t wrestle in 2020 and was 4-14 in 2019), yet somehow he was seeded higher than Michael North of Maryland, who despite being winless this year (an injury default and 2 4-point losses to Storr and Omania in his 3 duals) was 19-5 as a redshirt last year.

Share this post


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

Fernandes (who beat Slavikouski from Harvard that was seeded 10th at NCAA’s). Pelusi of F&M was probably a better win than Hoffman too, he had 20 wins including over 2x NQ Andrew Gunning of UNC.

Hoffman was 26-10 compared to Pelusi who was 20-15, but I'm with ya.

Edit: FWIW, I'm not bothered by Kerk's seed. 

Edited by Mphillips

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, CJE64 said:

I always find it funny reading you guys yammer...because its anonymous, you dont know who the poster is but you would think that all of you are returning NCAA AA’s...”most of these guys are pretty bad”...these are Big Ten wrestlers...are they really “bad”...again, I dont know the credentials of the posters but when so many cant figure out a basic twelve man bracket based on preseeds or dont know how the seeding criteria when critiquing, it makes me wonder.  before all of you start screaming, I recognize some of you had good careers and dont fall into my overview but man it would be interesting to see how much humility would creep in if the posters had to post their credentials before letting it rip. best time of the year, enjoy.

So you would be alright if Carl called Dake a bad wrestler, because Carl's undefeated career trumps Dake's 4 NC's with multiple losses?

Share this post


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

So you would be alright if Carl called Dake a bad wrestler, because Carl's undefeated career trumps Dake's 4 NC's with multiple losses?

Wasn't he defending the, "bad" wrestlers?

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...