Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
The_Education

125 bracket

Recommended Posts

Good Gawd this is a dumb question. Here is some criteria used in order.

#1 - defending National Champion

#2 - defending National Champion

#3 - Win Head to Head

#4 - Defending National Champion

#5 - wrestled way tougher schedule out of conference and in the Big Ten.

#6 - Defending National Champion

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This weight is actually straightforward. Delgado lost to gillman (who isn't in the tournament) and once to Nico (then beat nico to win B1Gs). Garrett lost to Delgado and beat nico 2x. Delgado>Garrett>nico

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
How does Delgado get the number one seed over Garrett? Garrett has one loss, to Delgado. Meanwhile, Delgado has losses to Gilman and Megaludis. Head-to-head should only be a factor when the number of losses are the same.

 

How would you seed it? I'm curious.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Gilman isn't even the starter and Delago beat the starter recently. Isn't there a duh factor in the system ?

 

I don't follow. Are you saying if a guy loses to 10 guys who start for only half the season, none of those losses count?

 

True, Gilman won a squeaker a few months ago over Delgado. Clark beats Gilman in a wrestle off or two. Delgado then beats Clark. It's kind of convoluted due to the fact that Iowa has 2 excellent 25's. It would not be a stretch by any means to deduce that Delgado would win over Gilman if he had a second chance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Gilman isn't even the starter and Delago beat the starter recently. Isn't there a duh factor in the system ?

 

I don't follow. Are you saying if a guy loses to 10 guys who start for only half the season, none of those losses count?

 

No, I'm saying the guy Iowa chose to start over the backup that our non-qualifying 125 pounder stuck, got beat straight up last weekend by Delgado so the backup is a non-factor in my simple mind. Is that easier to follow? :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's very clear from the seeding that bad losses do not matter. If you're going to lose, make sure it is to somebody that isn't going to be seeded. Those are freebies. See Helfin, Nick.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Gilman isn't even the starter and Delago beat the starter recently. Isn't there a duh factor in the system ?

 

I don't follow. Are you saying if a guy loses to 10 guys who start for only half the season, none of those losses count?

 

No, I'm saying the guy Iowa chose to start over the backup that our non-qualifying 125 pounder stuck, got beat straight up last weekend by Delgado so the backup is a non-factor in my simple mind. Is that easier to follow? :)

 

 

Okay, let me get this straight. Your argument is:

 

1) Gilman beat Delgado.

2) Gilman lost to Brancale.

3) Iowa chose to go with Clark for the postseason.

4) Delgado beat Clark.

 

Therefore, Delgado's loss to Gilman no longer matters.

 

Is that your argument? Because if it is, I'm sorry to say I don't follow it. In my mind, a loss is a loss.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
How does Delgado get the number one seed over Garrett? Garrett has one loss, to Delgado. Meanwhile, Delgado has losses to Gilman and Megaludis. Head-to-head should only be a factor when the number of losses are the same.

 

Let me give you a few other examples to test your consistency. Would you have seeded Morrison over Ramos? Would you have seeded Gwiazdowski over Nelson? Would you have seeded Dierenger over St. John? Unless you say yes to all of those you lose quite a bit of credibility.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Off topic, but it doesn't pay to have good loses either

Nick Moore was 21-3 with 2 of the loses to Taylor, he also defeated Cladwell in the Dual and he gets 5 seed and have to face taylor for 3rd time in quarters.

 

Really? Did he lose to a cheerleader or something for that 3rd loss? That's brutal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Off topic, but it doesn't pay to have good loses either

Nick Moore was 21-3 with 2 of the loses to Taylor, he also defeated Cladwell in the Dual and he gets 5 seed and have to face taylor for 3rd time in quarters.

 

The Monk loss CRUSHED Moore. It was the ONLY reason he got seeded where he did. I think Caldwell being the only remotely close match with Taylor made them make sure they were on opposite sides of the bracket. The only other thing they could have done was make Monk the 2 and Moore the 3 but then they would have made a 1 loss Sulzer the 5. Moore got the short end of the stick but I can at least see why they did it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes it did and was back at Midlands.

Wrestle in Big Ten can get u screwed when seeding comes, guys like Monk,Sulzer don't have as tough of regular season..

Yes shuck that is brutal, hey your man Zilverman had 12 loses and got 3rd in conference did he get a seed?

Tell me how did your 149 get a 2 seed?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Off topic, but it doesn't pay to have good loses either

Nick Moore was 21-3 with 2 of the loses to Taylor, he also defeated Cladwell in the Dual and he gets 5 seed and have to face taylor for 3rd time in quarters.

 

Really? Did he lose to a cheerleader or something for that 3rd loss? That's brutal.

 

Loss to Monk in the Midlands Finals...

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...