So we're now like the Patriots with Brady, or the Hawk wrestling teams from a few centuries ago, I mean decades ago.
2025 Hodge snubs Carter
- Thread starter Just another PSU Fan
- Start date
Nope. No deflategate, no taping walk-throughs, no scholarships beyond NCAA limits.
Its typically not the athletes that put teams into the above mentioned categories, its the obnoxious fan bases
We determine the quality of competition in part by past accomplishments. We all have a sense of how good guys are based on seeing them wrestle in the past. Then, you are judged by the quality of guys you beat *this year.*
So, Carter gets credit for beating defending champ Keckeisen because we know Keckeisen is really good because he made multiple finals and won a title. Hendrickson gets credit for beating Schultz, Kerk, and Gable because we know those guys are really good because they’ve all been in the finals and 2 won titles.
What neither gets credit for is their own past accomplishments. Carter doesn’t get credit for winning last year. Carter also doesn’t get credit for beating NCAA champs Mekhi Lewis and Shane Griffith because *that didn’t happen this season.*
You would all understand this instantly if the singlets were flipped and deep down, you know that.
When I read the four criteria, I see them as largely being in ranked order of importance and somewhat as sequential tiebreaker criteria.
It's not a coincidence that only undefeated wrestlers are candidates for the Hodge. That is the first criteria, record, so it needn't be further considered at all.
A mathematical formula already exists for most dominant. It inherently embeds bonus percentage and bonus type. So just use that. Create a scoring method based on the ideal maximum 6.0 and some reasonable minimum like 4.5. Extend it through the NCAA championships.
RPI relative to the weight class can be used as the measure of quality of competition. Again, create a scoring method based on RPI compared to say the 8 All Americans in the weight class.
Then weight the scoring of dominance and quality of competition equally.
Don't even bother with Sportsmanship unless there is a tie or exigent circumstance.
Pretty sure there's a know nothing about that can gin this up.
It's not a coincidence that only undefeated wrestlers are candidates for the Hodge. That is the first criteria, record, so it needn't be further considered at all.
A mathematical formula already exists for most dominant. It inherently embeds bonus percentage and bonus type. So just use that. Create a scoring method based on the ideal maximum 6.0 and some reasonable minimum like 4.5. Extend it through the NCAA championships.
RPI relative to the weight class can be used as the measure of quality of competition. Again, create a scoring method based on RPI compared to say the 8 All Americans in the weight class.
Then weight the scoring of dominance and quality of competition equally.
Don't even bother with Sportsmanship unless there is a tie or exigent circumstance.
Pretty sure there's a know nothing about that can gin this up.
Last edited:
You don't have to play hall monitor.
I’m imagining a conversation with a casual or new wrestling fan who heard about some huge upset at NCAAs and wants to know how college wrestling works and why we love it so much. After teaching him the basics, he asks –
Newbie: So, are there any great champions of the sport?
Us: Yes, there are lots.
Newbie: But any that are particularly notable for accomplishing something no one else has?
Us: Well, there’s this one guy named Starocci. He won 5 individual national championships, including 1 with a broken hand and 1 with a significant leg injury. No one in history has or likely ever will match that. He also won 3 Big 10 Conference titles and, aside from 2 losses during his RSFR year, he is undefeated in contested bouts his entire college career and beat a bunch of former national champs, conference champs, and All Americans along the way.
Newbie: Wow, impressive. So, how does the sport recognize its greatest champions?
Us: Well, there’s this award called the Hodge Trophy that is supposed to be given to the best college wrestler each season.
Newbie: That Starocci guy must have won a bunch of those.
Us: No, he never won any Hodge Trophies.
Newbie: Your sport is stupid.
Newbie: So, are there any great champions of the sport?
Us: Yes, there are lots.
Newbie: But any that are particularly notable for accomplishing something no one else has?
Us: Well, there’s this one guy named Starocci. He won 5 individual national championships, including 1 with a broken hand and 1 with a significant leg injury. No one in history has or likely ever will match that. He also won 3 Big 10 Conference titles and, aside from 2 losses during his RSFR year, he is undefeated in contested bouts his entire college career and beat a bunch of former national champs, conference champs, and All Americans along the way.
Newbie: Wow, impressive. So, how does the sport recognize its greatest champions?
Us: Well, there’s this award called the Hodge Trophy that is supposed to be given to the best college wrestler each season.
Newbie: That Starocci guy must have won a bunch of those.
Us: No, he never won any Hodge Trophies.
Newbie: Your sport is stupid.
Congrats to Wyatt. That said.......If Wyatt is considered the best wrestler in the NCAA.........why was beating Gable such a massive upset?
Dominance score (average team points per match):
Starocci: 4.8
Hendrickson: 5.1
Quality of Competiton:
Wins over 2025 AAs: tied at 8
Wins over former AA’s: Hendrickson 5, Starocci 3
Wins over former NCAA Champs: Tied at 2
Former NCAA champs defeated: Hendrickson 2, Starocci 1
There isn’t a statistical case to be made for Starocci based on this season. He was less dominant against with lower quality of competition.
“If Carter is the best wrestler in the NCAA, why is winning 5 so impressive?”
Yeah guys I don’t see why you’re all complaining, Carter will always have his 2022 Hodge Trophy.
Good God i have heard Gary tell a thousand stories, I haven't heard that one.
My point exactly. Thanks for finally agreeing. Carter's 5-year dominance and refusal to lose made him the favorite for many/most even though he moved up a weight and was going against the NCAA champ at a weight 10 pounds higher. And he won. Wyatt is a great wrestler and solid fan favorite. But....he had never come close to defeating Greg and was not expected to. Then Greg got hurt pretty badly in practice. He still made it to the semis where he was no longer a match for Wyatt. That gave Wyatt the chance to go at Gable. A healthy Greg would be a heavy favorite against Wyatt......having never come close to losing and beating him at the All-star match as well. . But life happens. Wyatt moved on and won to the delight of many....myself included. But....then I think......What if Mitchell got hurt and lost to Caliendo. Huge upset. Does that make Caliendo the best wrestler in the NCAA? I can't imagine many would say that. Applying the same analysis to the Wyatt Situation.....I obviously still go with Carter
Just go by this year's RPI. It's a single year award now. Past champions is meaningless.
Last edited:
I would say more Patriots with Brady.
I say this because, and this is a plus for the good guys, it’s all predicated on just winning more and not a cultural reputation of being the “bad boy”.
The difference there being how the Pats were seen under Brady vs how the Raiders were seen from inception to about 2005 (and really until today for those old enough to remember them actually being pretty good).
I always wonder this about fans from other teams here.
It’s such an internet phenomenon. In 1997 I would never go into Billy’s Black and Gold in beautiful downtown Sharon and try to convince the masses that actually Emmitt Smith deserved all pro over Jerome Bettis that year.
I know it doesn’t help your case but bonus pt victories against previous AA’s.
We can argue back and forth and I think you can make a case for either to get the hodge.
If you can’t consider past credentials then why are you considering past credentials?
Yeah, he's also talked a lot about sportsmanship and in the past it was pretty clearly an issue for Starocci, but I think he's mostly been on the level this season (Carter hasn't said or done anything that should have disqualified him from the award).
Last edited:
If Hendrickson wrestled in the Big 10, he wouldn’t have been undefeated. No way he beats Gable and healthy Greg in dual meet, b1Gs and NCAAs.
Then he woudn't have split the vote with Carter and Carter would have won the Hodge.
The bottom line is, Carter won the vote from the people that know. Former Hodge winners and media.
Biased fan voting decided the award this year. That's the way these things go. They're awards that are subjective. The awards that matter are the ones you get on a podium.
If Starocci wrestled in the Big 12, he wouldn’t have been undefeated. No way he beats both Keckeisen and Plott in a dual meet, Big 12s and NCAAs.
This kind of speculation goes both ways. Judge them on what actually happened.
Oh, for sure. I also love your point about the increased number of pins in the 285 weight class. The dominance score should be adjusted to account for this factor. Carter would have pinned many of the same guys that Hendrickson did, giving up 50-70 pounds. 😅
The Hodge isn’t for “the best wrestler in the NCAA.” It’s for the most dominant individual season.
Otherwise, Varner wins over Ness, Snyder over Zain, etc…
It has set criteria for a reason: to make the process clear and transparent to all. You guys just want to ignore the criteria because they don’t favor your guy.
That’s a tally for Starocci! But I included the categories that the Hodge committee included on their website. All that information is publicly available if you guys want to see it! It might enlighten you as to why Starocci lost.
We are using the criteria. It was close. Carter was the most dominant. You need to factor in the difference between the weight classes. 285 is not the same as 184.
Generally speaking, do you think a win over a past AA at 285 is just as difficult as a win over a past AA at 184? Generally speaking, do you think pinning the 30th ranked 285 lber is just as dominant as pinning the 30th ranked 184 lber? Generally speaking, do you think 285 lbers are easier to pin than 184 lbers?
Where is this in the criteria? Can you give me a quote or an example from WIN magazine that implies this?
Similar threads
Latest posts
-
-
Football James Franklin Speaks Highly on Trio of Young Wide Receivers
- Latest: Crusher1950
-
