I have a lot of beefs with it. I don’t think screwing with NCAA championship allocations is something that should be taken so lightly. But I appear to be on an island.
Conference Allocations Are Out!!
- Thread starter RoarLions1
- Start date
But this is where I would agree w/ smalls and mcpat. The B1G really did earn 10 AQs. If their 10th-place finisher is not given the extra at-large that Iowa created, then that 10th-place guy has a legit beef. If it’s Teske, the beef is with Iowa. If it’s someone else, the beef is with the NCAA Selection Committee and Iowa.
Hey, look at that — either way, Iowa is part of the problem. Who can’t live with that? 😉
Let's hope this, even if Teske finishes 10th at B1Gs.
100% agree.
100% agree.
I am not convinced of this. I will believe it only after I hear a firsthand explanation.
I feear that Teske, thru no fault of his own, will be booed mercilessly by all non-Iowa fans at NCAAs, if the worst case scenario materializes.
One of the reasons people spend a lot of apparent wasted time thinking of solutions for problems that don't exist is because sometimes there are people assigned simple tasks who are too stupid to accomplish the task.
Maybe Morningstar is secretly Ironturn.
The person it matters to is any kid that unfairly misses out on an opportunity to wrestle at the big dance, a dream for many, probably all college wrestlers. I'm not sure we can say who that one person is until after the tourneys and someone takes the time to do an in-depth review. If your "beef" is one of fairness, I'm with you.
I keep seeing people say 'it's no big deal' and 'i'm not losing sleep over it'
which is totally fine and your prerogative.
however, the B1G earned 10 slots and got 9. period. that's a failure in the system, no matter what degree of significance you personally assign to it.
which is totally fine and your prerogative.
however, the B1G earned 10 slots and got 9. period. that's a failure in the system, no matter what degree of significance you personally assign to it.
I'm not sure we'll ever be able to say who that one person is. Perception is reality. Multiple wrestlers who meet the criteria but don't get in, may feel they got jobbed regardless of the selection data. (Hopefully not, but the door is opened, unnecessarily.)
That's a problem into itself.
Just in case it was missed. It probably isn't the Big10 133 pound 10th place finisher that runs the risk of taking one. Because this has become so public there will be added pressure to take Mr. 10th Placer as an "at-large" selection.
As Creighton Edsell showed last year, there is a certain Big10 bias that follows the thought process that the Big10 gets enough wrestlers into the tournament and the 50-50s go to the non Big10 kids. So let's say at 133 Mr. Eleventh Placer is a border line "at-large" candidate. For him to get selected now, the Big10 needs 2 "at-large" invites at the weight. If everybody had been able to do their job, Mr Eleventh Placer has a much better shot at receiving an "at-large" invite.
Hopefully it plays out without somebody feeling like they were screwed by a coaches screw-up.
As Creighton Edsell showed last year, there is a certain Big10 bias that follows the thought process that the Big10 gets enough wrestlers into the tournament and the 50-50s go to the non Big10 kids. So let's say at 133 Mr. Eleventh Placer is a border line "at-large" candidate. For him to get selected now, the Big10 needs 2 "at-large" invites at the weight. If everybody had been able to do their job, Mr Eleventh Placer has a much better shot at receiving an "at-large" invite.
Hopefully it plays out without somebody feeling like they were screwed by a coaches screw-up.
I mean, I understand your point, but at some point you have to earn your spot. Finishing 11th in the Big TEN just doesn’t sound like it should be a ticket to the big dance.
Yet there are probably more than a couple examples that an 11th place finish in the Big10 is more difficult to accomplish than a 4th place finish in the ACC, EIWA, MAC or Big12.
Currently Itermat has Foley of MSU #21 Taylor Lamont of Wisc #32 and they are the 10th and 11th ranked BIG wrestlers. They both deserve a ticket to the dance but one of them will almost certainly not get one.
Unless they both finish top 9 at Big 10’s, then they automatically qualify. That’s what I would focus on. LaMont is 9-12 on the year so he probably should have beaten someone during the year to give himself a better chance of getting an at large. I wouldn’t feel bad for a guy with a losing record not getting an at large.
Yes.
Insert Teske into the NCAA Coaches-based Ranking, and that likely pushes Porter (26), Lamont (28), and Burwick (32) back one spot. All still could remain Top 33. Currently, Foley (19) is the 8th rated B1G 133lber in this ranking without Teske. I understand Foley earned the 8th allocation and Porter earned the 9th.
If Henry Porter (IND) earned the final 133 allocation for the B1G, can we be sure Teske's insertion would not have been a wash (i.e. caused Porter not to have earned one)?
I honestly don't know, but I suppose coaches not in the B1G could've been sensitive to the B1G's allocation and ranked some other B1G wrestlers even lower. I don't think we can ever know for sure.
The Iowa factor has brought a little greater focus on the individual performances among these wrestlers. I suppose there would've been similar pressure on these wrestlers without this factor, if one assumes the B1G is always unlikely to receive two or more at large bids at any weight, including 133.
Overall I am coming to conclude that this particular situation can't be shown to have had a material affect on the final result.
As long as the coaches input a list of wrestlers to the ranking and then rank the submitted wrestlers, the system can be gamed. In the interest of the appearance of integrity, it would be better if the system prevented honest mistakes from the potential appearance of gaming the system. It goes without saying that the system should also prevent actual gaming.
In this case, it looks like just a stupid oversight that will likely not have a material affect on the outcome, but it is still a flaw in the system that could be used for manipulation in the future. That is the bigger concern to me rather than an 11th place wrestler with a losing record missing out.
I’m running the brackets through wrestlestat based on the pre-seeds. Just finished 133 and Teske loses to Burwick in the 9th place bracket to finish 10th. Ironic for some of you? 😂😂
LOL. That's the best possible outcome. I think Teske would be more likely than anyone else to get an at-large as a 10th place finisher since it's easy to justify by saying it he would have had an automatic allocation if his coaches weren't so stupid (and he shouldn't be punished for that). And if he somehow doesn't, then Iowa just ends up punishing themselves for their own stupidity.
I agree. Wrestlestat has him losing to Foley 7-6 and then losing to LaMont 7-5 in the consi’s. Then he goes to the 6 man bracket for 9th. Gets a bye, beats Porter 8-7 and loses to Burwick 7-6. Obviously wrestlestat has some weird outcomes but it seems ironic he finished 10th after the controversy
You lost me at "wrestlestat" 😆 🤣 😂
I could predict the match scores myself. In that case Teske finishes 3rd and there is no controversy.
I could train a team of chimpanzees and they would be more accurate than wrestle stat.
I expect a full analysis at the end of the conference championships. Wrestlestat vs Intermat.
I'd like to see the chimp training. Gives us something to do between B10s and nationals.
He's driving over to M2 as we speak and stepping on it!I'd like to see the chimp training. Gives us something to do between B10s and nationals.
We’d really be talking if Cael could get chimps to wrestle folkstyle. Very strong power to weight ratio, but they do have a unfortunate penchant for eye gouging and biting fingers off
It's already been tested. Year in and year out, the chimpanzees that play KYPSW are no better and no worse than Wrestlestat. Except that the chimpanzees that play KYPSW utilize the great stuff on Wrestlestat to make their picks.
Ironturd says he could hire a monkey to coach the PSU teams to championships. It has to painful to realize the PSU staff is so superior to the Turd's Iowa staff. Anyhow, Turd may have a chimp available to test the theory on.
Nelson?
Ok, ok, 133 is a beaten-to-death horse and the hot topic now is B1G tournament seeds . . . but something else at 133 caught my eye and had me scratching my head a while tonight . . .
The NCAA news release I had opened (and kept open on my phone for several days) indicated that the Big 12 had only 5 pre-allocations, which is one reason the total among all conferences was 28 instead of 29.
However, I saw tonight for the first time a Big 12 news release from the same date
indicating the conference received 6 pre-allocations . . . which would mean that all 29 bids were filled.
So, after going through the rankings, RPIs, and winning percentages to try to figure out who all did indeed meet allocation criteria, I had 30 or 31 wrestlers. So that didn’t work out as I had hoped.
I then closed the NCAA release and re-opened it, and sure enough, it had been revised to show that the Big 12 received 6 allocations and that 29 overall were awarded at 133.
That means there are only 4 at-large berths available at 133, not the 5 that another poster and I had noted earlier.
Weird.
The NCAA news release I had opened (and kept open on my phone for several days) indicated that the Big 12 had only 5 pre-allocations, which is one reason the total among all conferences was 28 instead of 29.
However, I saw tonight for the first time a Big 12 news release from the same date
indicating the conference received 6 pre-allocations . . . which would mean that all 29 bids were filled.
So, after going through the rankings, RPIs, and winning percentages to try to figure out who all did indeed meet allocation criteria, I had 30 or 31 wrestlers. So that didn’t work out as I had hoped.
I then closed the NCAA release and re-opened it, and sure enough, it had been revised to show that the Big 12 received 6 allocations and that 29 overall were awarded at 133.
That means there are only 4 at-large berths available at 133, not the 5 that another poster and I had noted earlier.
Weird.
Among other rather crappy habits.
But it may be worth Cael’s while to prove he can coach up.
Weird? I am assuming the NCAA decided that since the Big10 had no use for their earned allotment they gave it the next deserving team. The Big12 thanks Morningstar.
Similar threads
