Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Flying-Tiger

Here Are The Names Behind The Seeding

Recommended Posts

This makes me really laugh.

Might be close tourney and already Penn fans whining .

LMAO stop the hate, heck all or most of wrestling have hated the Hawkeyes and Cowboys for over 30 years get use to it Penn State lol ..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
headshuck, you have done nothing but troll and bitch over the past few weeks. I'm starting to think you have given up on real wrestling talk.

 

and here I was just thinking the opposite... that headshuck is making some great posts of late!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
As a group, I am really beginning to hate Penn State fans. This thread reminds me of the pro life idiots that publish the names and home addresses of doctors that perform abortions. Flying-Tiger, you are the lowest of the low. Your only intent for these folks was harm. Get a life and grow up. I will never engage you again.

"Welcome to the party pal"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
By my rough numbers (and given the sizeable gap on either side of him with my rough numbers, in this specific case they are probably reliable), Gadson was 6th in the final (post-conference) RPI. This would probably at least help to explain his #5 seed.

Those numbers said Dake would be 0-8 at Nationals.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
don't think it looks good for PSU this year. Just one question though. If we assume that there is a consensus that the brackets are not in favor of PSU, if PSU wins their 4th will the board give them respect and props ?

 

You guys are kidding, right? Based on seeds alone, no bosus points, PSU is still favored to win it all by, what 8-10 points? How can anyone say this favors anyone BUT Penn State!? :?

 

And if they win it all - then yeah, they DO deserve respect and props - because regardless of the seedeng, they will still have to EARN it!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How about this. I know the timelines are tight..but is there any rationale for the committee to put

out a "preliminary" bracket seeding for comment...not unlike what .gov does for the public before implementing new regulations ? This would give them a step back moment to hear comment from the wrestling public and perhaps realize they may have erred in their thinking and thus allow them to rectify anything egregious prior to the "final" seedings?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's an interesting idea but I'm not sure how feasible it is. I would be happy if they at least published concrete criteria like they do for the qualification system. It's almost like they want to keep this information private so they don't have to be held to it. The coaches, wrestlers and fans deserve to know what they are basing these seeds off of and we should be able to get some explanations of what the thought process was. Is it really so unreasonable to ask for a press conference after the seeds are released so we can get some insight into these decisions?

 

pinnum said only the teams in contention care, but I can tell you ISU fans are up in arms over Gadson's seed. How about Citadel fans, is it fair their best wrestler, a returning AA with a 22-3 record, has to face the #3 seed in round 1? Ness #9, Moore #6, Tsirtsis #5, Dwieza and Gulibon not ranked, and there are plenty more examples of seeds that make absolutely no sense; and why are A.D.s that may not follow wrestling at all during the season allowed to influenza our sport? It's a poor system that needs to be changed.

 

Meanwhile, if someone like me even posts the names of the people that make the decision for at least a little transparency, I am vilified. Granted several are the usual suspect that have "I hate PSU" signs hanging in their basement.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
don't think it looks good for PSU this year. Just one question though. If we assume that there is a consensus that the brackets are not in favor of PSU, if PSU wins their 4th will the board give them respect and props ?

 

You guys are kidding, right? Based on seeds alone, no bosus points, PSU is still favored to win it all by, what 8-10 points? How can anyone say this favors anyone BUT Penn State!? :?

 

And if they win it all - then yeah, they DO deserve respect and props - because regardless of the seedeng, they will still have to EARN it!

 

+1 PSU will earn the same respect Iowa did in the 90s (and other times) when they won 4 in a row, and that okla state did in the 00s when they won 4 in a row. I highly doubt that during either of those runs iowa and okla state had completely favorable brackets every single year. Not to mention the streak in the 70s and 80s when Iowa won 9 in a row...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

flying tiger I am pretty sure you will take a month off of posting if psu doesn't win while you pout but I will take the bet if it means others will take it and we might get an off season without you since 8 people would be 8 months

 

if penn state doesn't win the title you are done posting a month for everyone that takes the bet and march 22 to april 22 will be for me and if psu wins I will be gone for that period of time

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
flying tiger I am pretty sure you will take a month off of posting if psu doesn't win while you pout but I will take the bet if it means others will take it and we might get an off season without you since 8 people would be 8 months

 

if penn state doesn't win the title you are done posting a month for everyone that takes the bet and march 22 to april 22 will be for me and if psu wins I will be gone for that period of time

 

OK, I'll second that!!

 

Do we hear three months?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

pinnum said only the teams in contention care, but I can tell you ISU fans are up in arms over Gadson's seed. How about Citadel fans, is it fair their best wrestler, a returning AA with a 22-3 record, has to face the #3 seed in round 1? Ness #9, Moore #6, Tsirtsis #5, Dwieza and Gulibon not ranked, and there are plenty more examples of seeds that make absolutely no sense; and why are A.D.s that may not follow wrestling at all during the season allowed to influenza our sport? It's a poor system that needs to be changed.

 

 

What is 'fair'?

 

I am a huge fan of Ugi but I think the seed is reasonable given he spent the majority of the season ineligible. It is unfortunate but for him, the unattached matches didn't count like they do with other kids because during that portion of the season he was ruled ineligible by the NCAA so his results couldn't count for him. His only match, that I can think of, against a high level opponent was in the F&M dual where he lost to #12 Durso.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
By my rough numbers (and given the sizeable gap on either side of him with my rough numbers, in this specific case they are probably reliable), Gadson was 6th in the final (post-conference) RPI. This would probably at least help to explain his #5 seed.

 

In other NCAA sports the RPI has been one of the most reliable ways to predict seeds and at-large bids. This has lead to critism in other sports too but it is an impartial way to help compare teams.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Although I understand and am not really surprised by the seeding, as most seem to be, I think there is a MAJOR FLAW in the current system.

 

The current system tries to eliminate any bias and look at each individual's season as a computer would. The problem with that is this sport, as much as or more than ANY other, is based off of past performances. In a HUGE majority of instances past AA's turn it on at the NCAA tournament. This is especially prevalent in those who have finished top 4 in the past. At the NCAA tournament the cream rises to the top. There are very few exceptions to this, injuries/illnesses not withstanding.

 

Because the NCAA tournament is the "Be all, end all" of College Wrestling, the season is basically a warm up. I take J. Jaggers as a perfect example of this. Even Mark Perry can be cited for this. They were simply a different animal come tournament time. They could have a head scratcher or 2 during the season but they were NOT going to lose to that guy, in fact they may pin him, come tourney time.

 

I know the current system wants to look at each season in a vacuum and award the wrestlers for ONLY that season. However, the way College Wrestling is set up past accomplishments mean as much or even more than current season results.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm OK with that flaw because I don't know of a perfect system to address peaking towards March. I suppose you could overweight results with more recency, since that captures progress towards a March peak, but that doesn't seem right at all. And I'm against having performance from past seasons count towards seeding for the reasons mentioned that separate thread.

 

My main issue with the seeding is that it follows different criteria than the regular season rankings, especially RPI. If you want to make the regular season matter more, why would you use a different system to seed nationals? Even if seeding approximated RPI more closely, I think it would be an improvement.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Although I understand and am not really surprised by the seeding, as most seem to be, I think there is a MAJOR FLAW in the current system.

 

The current system tries to eliminate any bias and look at each individual's season as a computer would. The problem with that is this sport, as much as or more than ANY other, is based off of past performances. In a HUGE majority of instances past AA's turn it on at the NCAA tournament. This is especially prevalent in those who have finished top 4 in the past. At the NCAA tournament the cream rises to the top. There are very few exceptions to this, injuries/illnesses not withstanding.

 

Because the NCAA tournament is the "Be all, end all" of College Wrestling, the season is basically a warm up. I take J. Jaggers as a perfect example of this. Even Mark Perry can be cited for this. They were simply a different animal come tournament time. They could have a head scratcher or 2 during the season but they were NOT going to lose to that guy, in fact they may pin him, come tourney time.

 

I know the current system wants to look at each season in a vacuum and award the wrestlers for ONLY that season. However, the way College Wrestling is set up past accomplishments mean as much or even more than current season results.

 

The problem with what you propose is that you are allowing athletes to basically take time off during the season and not be penalized. Or, rather, allowing athletes to work hard all season and not have their efforts validated. An athlete can still win an NCAA title and can still make the podium if they have an unseeded pigtail and meet the top seed if they win.

 

I think it is best to look at the season, as you say, in a vacuum. In wrestling we always talk about how you have to earn your way and each season is new and has a different dynamic. I don't see any reason to make it even more subjective.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My main issue with the seeding is that it follows different criteria than the regular season rankings, especially RPI. If you want to make the regular season matter more, why would you use a different system to seed nationals? Even if seeding approximated RPI more closely, I think it would be an improvement.

 

What regular season rankings are you talking about? There are no NCAA ranking during the season. There are rankings done by different media outlets and they make up their own criteria.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My main issue with the seeding is that it follows different criteria than the regular season rankings, especially RPI. If you want to make the regular season matter more, why would you use a different system to seed nationals? Even if seeding approximated RPI more closely, I think it would be an improvement.

 

What regular season rankings are you talking about? There are no NCAA ranking during the season. There are rankings done by different media outlets and they make up their own criteria.

 

My point is that it would be great to have a system that tracks rankings that approximate the system used for seeding as much as possible throughout the season. Instead of having a bunch of rankings that don't mean jack, followed by a period of suspense, followed by a surprise when the seeds come out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Although I understand and am not really surprised by the seeding, as most seem to be, I think there is a MAJOR FLAW in the current system.

 

The current system tries to eliminate any bias and look at each individual's season as a computer would. The problem with that is this sport, as much as or more than ANY other, is based off of past performances. In a HUGE majority of instances past AA's turn it on at the NCAA tournament. This is especially prevalent in those who have finished top 4 in the past. At the NCAA tournament the cream rises to the top. There are very few exceptions to this, injuries/illnesses not withstanding.

 

Because the NCAA tournament is the "Be all, end all" of College Wrestling, the season is basically a warm up. I take J. Jaggers as a perfect example of this. Even Mark Perry can be cited for this. They were simply a different animal come tournament time. They could have a head scratcher or 2 during the season but they were NOT going to lose to that guy, in fact they may pin him, come tourney time.

 

I know the current system wants to look at each season in a vacuum and award the wrestlers for ONLY that season. However, the way College Wrestling is set up past accomplishments mean as much or even more than current season results.

 

The problem with what you propose is that you are allowing athletes to basically take time off during the season and not be penalized. Or, rather, allowing athletes to work hard all season and not have their efforts validated. An athlete can still win an NCAA title and can still make the podium if they have an unseeded pigtail and meet the top seed if they win.

 

I think it is best to look at the season, as you say, in a vacuum. In wrestling we always talk about how you have to earn your way and each season is new and has a different dynamic. I don't see any reason to make it even more subjective.

 

I, for the most part, agree with you. I do not think past accomplishments should be a major factor. I do, however, think it should play some part in the seeding. Historical data shows too many trends to fully ignore. In fact ignoring it can inevitably penalize the guy who had a great season. A perfect example is Ness at 9. His season doesn't deserve any more than that. However, does Pena really deserve to have to seem him in R2? Even worse is Green will have to see him, if he gets past Pena, in the quarters. At least with Jaggers it was prior to the new criteria and they still seeded him relatively high compared to his senior season results.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

no seedings system or bracket placement won't leave some group screwed over. it doesnt matter what criteria you use or how transparent you make it. the goal of seeding is to keep the favorites from seeing each other early on in the tournament. not to perfectly rank everyone's true talent level and match it up with their seed. its a double elimination tournament, some seeds are luckier than others but everyone has to earn their place.

 

but i do find the idea of a bunch of disgruntled fans emailing the seeding committee to voice their displeasure highly amusing.

 

kind of like:

angry_letter_writers.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
In regard to the seeds, I really don't think PSU got it that bad.

 

No kidding. Dylan Alton finishes in 8th place at the B1G yet still gets a 13 seed. Ahead of #16 Brunson who had just majored him at the B1G and ahead of 4th place finisher Brian Murphy who is unseeded.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
no seedings system or bracket placement won't leave some group screwed over. it doesnt matter what criteria you use or how transparent you make it. the goal of seeding is to keep the favorites from seeing each other early on in the tournament. not to perfectly rank everyone's true talent level and match it up with their seed. its a double elimination tournament, some seeds are luckier than others but everyone has to earn their place.

 

but i do find the idea of a bunch of disgruntled fans emailing the seeding committee to voice their displeasure highly amusing.

 

kind of like:

angry_letter_writers.jpg

 

Agreed. There is no way to make a perfect system. There will always be user error. I do, however, think this is probably the most impartial format you can create.

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...