Brooks at #3 has to be in top 10 of biggest seeding jokes ever. Behind 2 wrestlers with losses as well is comical. Deans 9 seed isnt too far behind.
Biggest seeding jokes of all time.
- Thread starter PSUWrestlingFanSince2011
- Start date
Brooks has a loss to Coleman, who Keckheisen beat. Brooks doesn't qualify for an RPI. Hidlay has better quality wins. All 3 have 1 loss. Accomplishments with respect to prior seasons are not part of the criteria. And Brooks is gonna ruin the field anyway, even if you seed him at 33.
Last edited:
Let's whine about Kerk's draw because it's almost but not quite as gift-wrapped as Spencer's.
Anybody?
Anybody?
BTW, worst seed in the Cael Era, hands down, was 17-1 Cody Brewer getting the 13. He won the title with 4 bonus wins.
That wasn't even bad seeding in hindsight. SEVEN of the top 12 seeds finished the year with 7 or more losses. 17-1 guy gets the 13.
That wasn't even bad seeding in hindsight. SEVEN of the top 12 seeds finished the year with 7 or more losses. 17-1 guy gets the 13.
I thought the Brooks seed was fine. He decided to sit out a lot of duals. He lost to the 5 seed. If he wrestles all the matches or goes undefeated in limited matches he is the clear #1
Prior Years results are not factored at all everybody knows that. Take the Singlets off and evaluate body of work for this year only and seed them. Let me know what you come up with.
I like the idea of rewarding wrestlers that compete in every event.
He has wrestled Hidlay two years in a row at Nationals a 6-4 OT win and 3-2 win
Had they gave him the Top seed he would get the guy that beat him in semifinals. This draw is just fine.
Brooks will shine under the bright lights and win close but controlled matches over Hidlay then Parker.
Prior Years results are not factored at all everybody knows that. Take the Singlets off and evaluate body of work for this year only and seed them. Let me know what you come up with.
I like the idea of rewarding wrestlers that compete in every event.
He has wrestled Hidlay two years in a row at Nationals a 6-4 OT win and 3-2 win
Had they gave him the Top seed he would get the guy that beat him in semifinals. This draw is just fine.
Brooks will shine under the bright lights and win close but controlled matches over Hidlay then Parker.
I do think that Dean's seed seems a little low. If he wins Big Tens and finishes 21-2 he is likley seeded Top 5 so that one loss dropped him to 9. That seems like a steep drop.
Hard not to see the negative posts, tweets, whatever else they are called on social media re. the seeding. Some even show up here. I can say with high confidence that most don't have a clue about the process.
That one loss was huge. It placed Allred in front for sure as the 25 pts for a HTH win is significant, and finishing 2nd in the conference gave the champs in other conferences 10 points. His CR also took a hit, so he lost those points (10) to several near the top of 197. In a weight class that is closely contested, which 197 is, this is what happens. Should be fun.
I think how badly he lost to Allred is what cost him the most. He looked awful on his feet - Allred just smoked him in Neutral. He losses a really close match like 2-1 after SV & TB, he probably doesn't drop that far. But how badly he was dominated by a 5-loss wrestler almost certainly factored into it.
Well, yes. Also that's wrestling's fault.
The process is more complex than needed, requires 3rd party translations, and its results require rationalization.
It mostly works now, but causes a lot of needless confusion. And if we expect fans to understand it, then it needs to be much more intuitive.
There are A LOT of expectations/demands of the seeding.
The process needs to be easy enough for casual fans to understand, objective enough to remove potential bias from those doing the seeding, subjective enough to make sure the objective criteria doesn't produce results that fail the eye test, nuanced enough to punish guys who for not wrestling matches, while also factoring in strength of schedule, the relative strength of conferences (which changes by year and by weight), and injury status for wrestlers...
Exactly why I am on this board. A lot of great posters understand this process much better than I ever will. I appreciate all of their input.
What has been more redundant discussion on this board?
1. A discussion of a hypothetical Spencer vs RBY match
2. An explanation of how Brooks fell to the 3
1. A discussion of a hypothetical Spencer vs RBY match
2. An explanation of how Brooks fell to the 3
This is sarcasm right? Spencer's path is a cakewalk because he's a TF/PIN level favorite over the field except for Pat Glory, who he might be a similar level favorite over as well.
Not part of the criteria. A fall and a SV loss are both losses. Win % is the same, RPI is the same, HTH is the same, QW is the same, and so on.
Of course it was.
But it was mostly aimed at people who complain about their guy getting hosed, without admitting their other guy got a perfect setup after losing the conference final.
True, though theoretically Dean's coaches rank might have suffered, so a possible indirect effect.
That is, if the coaches (or the interns who actually voted) watched the match, or inferred anything from the score.
So possible but not probable ... and it's not like that match's score or substance dropped Dean from 5 to 9.
The worst thing about Max's draw is seeing Allred in the 2nd RD. Allred wrestling much better at end of season and looks like he could make it to finals. Honestly don't see Max beating him the way their match went in B1G Finals. Allred was dominant in Neutral.
If I was a betting man my money would be on Max. He'll be ready for those low leg attacks this time around.
Dean has overcome bigger losses to better wrestlers, such as an undefeated returning national champ.
I hear you, but that Allred match was much worse than the final score imho. It just wasn't close and Max didn't look like he had a tank advantage either.
Martin's 2 wins over Dean that year were more convincing.
I do agree that the wildcard is whether Allred can handle Dean's top-wrestling. I think Dean needs to focus completely on defense (as much as I hate to say that as he's going to have to "slow the match down" imho) - Dean prevents the takedowns and that match goes into 3rd with Dean leading 1-0 and Allred needs to choose down rather than Neutral...... Again, we still don't know how Allred will do on bottom against Max, whose ride is elite.
Meh. Smith wrestled much of the year at a different weight (which can't count toward seeding), then took 5th at B12s (much better indicator -- not the placement itself as much as the specific opponents).
I agree that he wasn't the 33rd best wrestler in the bracket, but it's hard to argue he earned more than 31.
Plus there was the entertainment value of Marinelli opening against a returning AA.
Not an official match, and not one of the 13 (two short of an RPI, mind you) that carried any weight in seeding other than the coaches rankings.
If Brooks had gone to ANY random open and gone 2-0 and then MFF out, we wouldn’t be having this discussion.
It wore Marinelli out. Haven't you heard?
And he won me my bracket pool that year as I was the only one to pick him to win!!
Or… we could just have a seeding process that doesn’t make the guy who would be a massive betting favorite (maybe the highest of anyone in the country outside of Lee) the #3.
And gave Marinelli a run before gassing out. There were pitchforks and torches on HR with that draw.
i guess i shouldn't be surprised but complaining about a 9 seed when he has losses to the 4,5, and 8 and his best win is the 13 is so funny
Brooks is the one guy I'm not that concerned about. He's just so much better than the field. The coaches said he wants to give freestyle a go this year after the season and they're just trying to keep him healthy per AB's request. That's the reason for low match count. He doesn't care about the seeding because he's better than his competitors.
Broken Leg Suriano at #3 was much worse.
Similar threads
