Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Jimmy Cinnabon

Caffey over Dean?

Recommended Posts

For B10 seeding does Caffey get the 2 seed over Dean?

Max Dean: ranked #1 on Intermat, 15-1.  But that 1 loss is to Caffey, 3-2.

Cam Caffey: ranked #5 on Intermat, 25-4.  Losses to Illinoi's Wroblewski (unranked), Jake Kozer (ranked 25), Michael Beard (Dean's backup), and Jake Woodley (ranked 17).

 

Caffey has the H2H, but 3 more losses, including 1 B10 loss...or 2 if you count Beard as B10.  And a loss to an unranked wrestler.

Share this post


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

If Dean had wrestled and beat Schultz, he'd be the number 1 seed. That said, I'd reward Caffey with the 2 seed over Dean for the H2H and wrestling every match this season.

I get H2H is important, but does it trump all.  What if Caffey had another B10 loss on his record?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dean does not strike me as likley to fret too much about what seed he gets - though he might be annoyed and be that much meaner.   

Do the coaches all meet and vote on each seed?  Would love to be a fly on that wall to hear all of the sandbagging, filibustering, and antics to find the favored seeding.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Elevator said:

Dean does not strike me as likley to fret too much about what seed he gets - though he might be annoyed and be that much meaner.   

Do the coaches all meet and vote on each seed?  Would love to be a fly on that wall to hear all of the sandbagging, filibustering, and antics to find the favored seeding.   

The pre-seeds are based on coach votes. I don't think they do that in person. Then there is a meeting to discuss the pre-seeds. There a coach can lobby for a change, but I believe you are limited to moving 1 position.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So maybe the B10 at 197 looks like this?

1. Schultz

2. Caffey

3. Dean

4.  Warner

Even if you flip flop Caffey & Dean they still end up 2 & 3 right?  And since Schultz beat Warner and was undefeated in the B10 at 197 - not sure there is any other way for the seeding to go, eh?

I know Dean beat Warner - did Caffey and Warner meet?

 

 

Edited by JerryCallo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, JerryCallo said:

So maybe the B10 at 197 looks like this?

1. Schultz

2. Caffey

3. Dean

4.  Warner

Even if you flip flop Caffey & Dean they still end up 2 & 3 right?  And since Schultz beat Warner and was undefeated in the B10 at 197 - not sure there is any other way for the seeding to go, eh?

I know Dean beat Warner - did Caffey and Warner meet?

 

 

Caffey and Warner didn't wrestle this year

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Caffey is the people’s champion.  Kid is smooth and has uncanny instinctual quickness. He can beat anybody on any given day.

 

Problem is he can lose to anybody as well. In multiple day tournaments it will be hard for him to string together big wins. 

I wish him well and will be cheering for him

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The discussion point seems to be whether seeds are a reward for past performance based or a projection of who would win today?  I like seeding to reward performance rather than project an individual contest.  In other words, seeds are earned based on RECENT performance rather than bequeathed based on distant past performance or potential.

In this case of who is 2 and who is 3 it is a moot point unless the 6 seed is miles ahead of the 7 seed in capability and performance.  I like H2H having an outsized portion of the criteria.  Not the only criteria but in this case I think it is properly applied.

Edited by Lipdrag

Share this post


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

The discussion point seems to be whether seeds are a reward for past performance based or a projection of who would win today?  I like seeding to reward performance rather than project an individual contest.  In other words, seeds are earned based on RECENT performance rather than bequeathed based on distant past performance or potential.

In this case of who is 2 and who is 3 it is a mute point unless the 6 seed is miles ahead of the 7 seed in capability and performance.  I like H2H having an outsized portion of the criteria.  Not the only criteria but in this case I think it is properly applied.

https://www.grammarly.com/blog/moot-point/#:~:text=A moot point is a,Moot rhymes with boot.

 

Otherwise I agree entirely.

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...