Either way, thank you for confirming that based upon the criteria of the day, the Hodge Committee made an exception for a 2x champ.
An exception they were unwilling to make for a 5x champ.
That's the thumb in the eye.
2025 Hodge snubs Carter
- Thread starter Just another PSU Fan
- Start date
An exception they were unwilling to make for a 5x champ.
That's the thumb in the eye.
Have you seen how some cesspool members have treated him? Gobblin and JS will not be sharing toddies in the near future.
"The Criteria" gives you no guidance as to how to compare between finalists. You chose to equally compare the dominance scores in two different weight classes. Frankly, I don't think that's the best way to compare because results are then skewed toward certain less-deep weights (which do tend to happen at the top and bottom weight classes). And yes, voting on the Hodge trophy winner, even when given a list of criteria to use as guidance, does require a bit of subjectivity. If it didn't, there would be no reason to vote. It would just simply be awarded like the other NCAA season-ending awards (falls, tfs, most dominant).
I wasn't rationalizing that Carter should have won. I was just pointing out to those with a quick trigger finger that it is a debateable topic and the fact that someone opines that Carter deserved to win should not be summarily dismissed. It would be a valid opinion.
That's cool! I just included all the information that WIN magazine included in its description of the criteria. That's what I default to since its their award.
Starocci didn't lose it......Wyatt won it. Carter won the Media/Hodge winner vote and Wyatt won the fan vote.....which counted as 5 votes. That moved Wyatt ahead of Carter. Both are deserving champions. By this year's rules.....Wyatt wins fair and square.
But that doesn't mean we can't discuss and argue about it. What else am I gonna do?..........Laundry?
That's a good point, but maybe they learned their lesson since nobody was happy with them when they did that? Two wrongs don't make a right, after all.
The major difference between the two is that Spencer was the clear winner according to their criteria whereas Carter was not. That might factor in why they felt the need to intercede on Spencer's behalf.
Clear is subjective. I can make arguments statistically that show Carter > Wyatt and Mitchell >Wyatt. I could make them for Spencer > Gable and vice versa.
Only objective is the vote. In 2021, for some reason, they made a co-winner (I imagine it was because everyone had like 5 matches before conferences but just the same, it happened).
Whatever your wife tells you to do.....Starocci didn't lose it......Wyatt won it. Carter won the Media/Hodge winner vote and Wyatt won the fan vote.....which counted as 5 votes. That moved Wyatt ahead of Carter. Both are deserving champions. By this year's rules.....Wyatt wins fair and square.
But that doesn't mean we can't discuss and argue about it. What else am I gonna do?..........Laundry?
There was no clear winner in 2021 because there was no written weighting of the criteria.
But even if true, what that means is: the Hodge Committee accepts the vote when they like it, and makes exceptions when they don't.
Your myopic view of WIN’s criteria and refusal to acknowledge valid perspectives different than yours weakens the credibility of your argument.
No, because it is WIN's award, so the criteria are what matters! They publish them for a reason.
I can understand all sorts of perspectives about why Starocci was deserving of an award or that he would have won under the old criteria - which is very likely. What you can't hand waive away is that WIN made this a purely seasonal award. That Hendrickson had a higher dominance score, better sportsmanship, and arguably better quality of competition.
Focusing on the *criteria for the award we're discussing* isn't "myopic." It's following the directions! Your argument has no credibility because it relies on throwing out the very clear stated criteria for the award. That's every individual's prerogative, but that doesn't make it credible or right.
1) They got destroyed for it the first time, so they probably said "never again."
2) This year the vote winner aligned with the criteria, whereas the last time the clear criteria leader did not win the vote, so they wanted to intervene (wrongly!).
Distant 3) Carter Starocci is not likeable. They have zero motivation to stick their necks out for him.
"The Hodge Fan Vote winner gets five official first-place ballots to be put with the votes from the Hodge Trophy Voting Committee. The winner will be announced Monday, March 31st at 12 PM CST."
Where does the criteria say by a plurality that isn't even a simple majority, all 5 Fan votes shall go to the single greatest fan vote getter?
I have been disenfranchised AF by WIN ffs!!!
All that being said, while you may disagree, you surely can understand people who think Carter should have won, no? In other words, it's not an irrational opinion worthy of 40+ posts attempting to shoot it down.
I'm saying that once you squeeze the tube, the toothpaste doesn't go back in.
If the Hodge Commiittee doesn't want to live up to their precedent, then they shouldn't have set it for anything short of extraordinary.
That's the thing, he thinks the Spencer Precedent was over extraordinary circumstances: It was Spencer.
Willy just contradicted himself on basch n the brain. Says got to go most dominant and carter has most dominant. Willy how many fat guys work off their back when put there. Overtime wins do matter when you have to chase guys off the mat all match. Quality of competition is carters. You voted for waytt for 1 win in finals. By what you saying.
Biggest question, did Willie vote in a similar state of intoxication as the Pyles Rant Friday Night? If so, I am cool with it.
Sure, but this doesn't actually meet the "precedent." The vote winner and the criteria leader aligned. You think they should have intervened to go against their own criteria?
They did it in 2021. Without weighting, the criteria are merely CYA for the voters and the committee.
Or how about who gets to decide the individuals that make up this group: "a retired coach from each region, a representative of each national wrestling organization and national media members"? What even are the regions? Or which national wrestling organizations? Who are the media members and how are they selected? So arbitrary and seemingly unnecessary considering the objective criteria is all you need.
I was saying one could make an argument that he is in the top ten but that argument would be iffy your are right he isn't even close to being anywhere near all time great wrestling status
WIN magazine said they made them co winners because they both had the same amount of first place votes. Which is why I think they added this stupid fan vote as some sort of way of getting rid of a tie
So what they did is take the voting completely out of the hands of people who had a vote And left it up to fans who effectively did not follow any of the criteria needed to have a damn vote in the first place lmfao the fan vote won Hyatt the hodge so make it a fan vote and leave the rest of the winners out of it or take the fans out of it and just leave it up to former winners
There were literally people trying to argue Keckeisen deserved it over Brooks last year and spun a narrative (using the every time Brooks beat him before needs to be ignored argument since it's a season award)
Luckily, common sense prevailed overwhelmingly there.
I thought Basch could have mounted a better defense. Willie - "it goes to most dominant". Then seconds later "well 3% points is only one match so bonus % doesn't matter". Einsteinian logic.
Carter gave up 1 TD all year, Wyatt didn't look all that dominant on his back. Just sayin
Carter gave up 1 TD all year, Wyatt didn't look all that dominant on his back. Just sayin
Last edited:
Because they held similar season numbers actually but Parker wrestled more matches.
Similar threads
