Because one of the criteria for getting an at large bid is finishing within one place of an auto qualifier. Finishing TWO spots for an AQ in not one of the criteria so there is no reason to wrestle off for 9th except to possibly benefit Bartlett.
At-large Bids
- Thread starter dtrainers
- Start date
Because one of the criteria for getting an at large bid is finishing within one place of an auto qualifier. Finishing TWO spots for an AQ in not one of the criteria so there is no reason to wrestle off for 9th except to possibly benefit Bartlett.
.
Is that a serious question? If RBY, Nick Lee, Starocci, or Brooks had gone 0-2 do you think they should not have gotten an at large?
Beau Bartlett reminds me nothing of Brands the past 2 years. Absolutely nothing. And that is a good thing.
Whether the ninth place tournaments would have related directly to that specific criteria, it would have provided more data points for the at-large committee to consider. With the limited number of matches everyone had this year, this was a missed opportunity.
And, if nothing else, more wrestling for us to watch in general.
He doesn't remind you of a potentially top 10 talent at his correct weight struggling to find that same success up a weight?
I guess you're right. Brands had way more success at 184 last year than Bartlett had this year.
I actually liked that comparison you made. That being said, Brands is in his 3rd year at Iowa. Bartlett is in his first and it happens to be the weirdest year ever. He kind of just wrestled 149 just to not sit out all together on probably like less than a months notice.
Yeah, I wasn't trying to compare future trajectories, styles, etc... Just two guys that had to wrestle up to get into the lineup. Based on Big Tens, I think if Bartlett had the whole season, he would probably be close to what Brands was last year, a toss up with everyone from 10-20 and solid NQ. Maybe some more upside because he's more talented imo.
I definitely agree Nelson is a natural 174, he can have that spot after Kemdawg clears it and let Assad slide back into 184 (after a redshirt). I've heard he can make 165 also if he really wants (which might be needed depending on if Kennedy is a 174 and who's better)
You guys have options for sure post 2022!
The conference tournament are like state regionals.
They arent balanced but it helps to weed things out. It also is the place for under dogs, also rans and your typical fish to have a magical weekend and make the show.
So I love regionals and further love conferences.
Ps- it's an extra weekend of team scoring, great matches and usually drama. Why would we do anything else.
Pss - super regionals are an abomination
With you 100% on the college scene. Also;
-- True freshmen and RS freshmen that start have developed during the season and most had a steeper improvement curve than sophomores and older
-- Kills the dreams of ANY kid, regardless of weight class, that had a slow start to a season ... everyone starts even at conference tourney time
As far as I’m aware The list of criteria creates a qualifying point, not a disqualifying point. Otherwise the list would eliminate pretty much everyone. That means being one place out puts the wrestler in the running. If I wrestler places two spots out but hits some other criteria then they are in the running for an at large. That would mean it’s useful to have more data.
Unless I’m wrong. And then I have to chug a beer so here’s to hoping I’m wrong. Lol.
You are correct. It's one of 6 criteria (in normal seasons), and a wrestler needs to meet 2. None are disqualifying if they are not reached.
The discussion is about the benefit of having bonus coverage when there are 7 or fewer allocated spots. Imho, the only purpose of the mini-tournament is to determine a 9th place wrestler, so it's not needed when there are 7 or fewer.
Latest posts
-
Football Penn State LB Dominic DeLuca announces return for 2025 season
- Latest: PoquosonLion
-
-
-
