How Did The Big Ten Really Fare At NCAA's?

[RoarLions1]

All the data suggests the conference did very well indeed. In this first chart, we see that 35 of the 92 Big Ten Qualifiers AA'd. The % is the highest on the chart.

Row Labels	Count of Conference	Count of NCAA Finish	% of qualifiers that AA'd
ACC	39​	12​	30.8%​
Big 12	62​	16​	25.8%​
Big Ten	92​	35​	38.0%​
EIWA	48​	2​	4.2%​
MAC	40​	6​	15.0%​
Pac 12	27​	8​	29.6%​
SoCon	21​	1​	4.8%​

More to come...

 

[RoarLions1]

-- Of the 35 Big Ten All-Americans, 28 wrestled at or better than their seed. Said another way, only seven of the 35 AA's wrestled below their seed, but still finished top-8.

-- 10 wrestlers seeded outside the top-8 became All-Americans for the Big Ten, while only 5 wrestlers seeded 8th or higher did not earn All-American status.

-- By weight class, the 10 mentioned in the last bullet are; 125-2, 141-1, 149-1, 165-1, 174-1, 197-1, 285-3.

-- Every weight class was represented by Big Ten AA's. 285, with 6AA's, and 141 & 174 with 5 each were the highest numbers.

 

[RoarLions1]

In the two weight classes discussed in another thread, 125 & 149, here's some data;

At 125, the Big Ten had two wrestlers seeded top-8, the #1 seed and the #8 seed. The Big Ten took home AA honors for 1st, 3rd, and 8th place, 37.5% of the AA honors with 30% of the wrestlers in the field.

At 149, the Big Ten had two wrestlers seeded top-8, the #1 seed and the #5 seed. The Big Ten took home AA honors for 2nd and third place.

 

[NoVaLion2]

I always love these stats... Kind of pulls the rug out from any arguments that the B1G gets more than its share of slots.

 

[El-Jefe]

EIWA 4%. Ugh.

EIWA had 22 wrestlers (46%) go 0-2. Which pretty much proves what everyone said about over-allocations.

To bad Bartlett couldn't have gotten one of the 3 EIWA 0-2 slots at 149.

 

[KidDagger]

I always love these stats... Kind of pulls the rug out from any arguments that the B1G gets more than its share of slots.

How was there ever any argument?? If anything, it’s the complete opposite... ones chances of qualifying for nationals is higher in the other conferences then they are in big 10; relative to talent lvl..

 

[Cali_Nittany]

Great info Roar!

 

[dunkej01]

Thanks roar. Love the data

 

[Callthestall]

Will those figures be used next year for tournament allocation. If so the EIWA just lost some free tickets.

 

[nitlion6]

Will those figures be used next year for tournament allocation. If so the EIWA just lost some free tickets.

Past performance used to be the measuring stick for allocations and the Big10 was not allowed to have the total earned.
The argument for discontinuing that process was there were too many top 33 wrestlers not being included and the only reason the Big10 got so many round of 12 guys was because they were given so many qualifiers. Yeah, bullshit. The Big10 always has a percentage of champs, finalists, semi-finalists, quarter-finalists, AAs, round of 12 guys that is far larger than their percentage of competitors.

 

[PSUer1989]

As good as the Big Ten is, though, you can’t condemn schools for cuttting wrestling while at the same time want to limit paths to success for the smaller conferences. There has to be a reasonable path of being able to make the NCAA tournament for everyone. There may be highly skilled BIG athletes missing out in favor of other conferences, but the advantage of wrestling in a dominant conference in preparation outweighs the allocation issues, IMO. I know John Smith agreed per his comments about Fox’s preparation.

 

[BruceK-PSU83]

EIWA 4%. Ugh.

EIWA had 22 wrestlers (46%) go 0-2. Which pretty much proves what everyone said about over-allocations.

To bad Bartlett couldn't have gotten one of the 3 EIWA 0-2 slots at 149.

Yeah, that 4.2% AA number really jumps out. And the 46% rate of "two and out" is probably even more telling of the EIWA weakness.

Losing the Ivies (Cornell and Princeton in particular) really gutted the EIWA. The NCAA allocations should have been adjusted accordingly. It's a shame, really.

 

[jrod65]

The NCAA allocations should have been adjusted accordingly. It's a shame, really.

I'm curious as to which wrestlers missed out on NCAAs due to the conference allocations allotment that people really felt should have been in the tournament.
I'm guessing that most here will probably reply with Bartlett, so anyone else that comes to mind?

Who were some of the ranked guys that were left out?

 

[McScoreley]

Everyone knew this would happen with the EIWA. It was pretty obvious when you give them the Ivy League allocations when the Ivies weren't competing that all due respect, some normally undeserving wrestlers would get one over another conference. Willie did the analysis on this (Ranking vs Allocations) and we all knew it would be a turkey shoot with them.

Has any team ever sent 10 qualifiers and left with 0 AA's?

 

[El-Jefe]

I'm curious as to which wrestlers missed out on NCAAs due to the conference allocations allotment that people really felt should have been in the tournament.
I'm guessing that most here will probably reply with Bartlett, so anyone else that comes to mind?

Who were some of the ranked guys that were left out?

Somebody would need to go back and dig up the list of those eligible for an at large.

Off the top of my head: Ed Scott could've gone too.

But considering how many low seeds placed this year -- including a 33 seed alternate replacement -- limiting snubs to "ranked guys" isn't the entire story.

 

[Cali_Nittany]

Everyone knew this would happen with the EIWA. It was pretty obvious when you give them the Ivy League allocations when the Ivies weren't competing that all due respect, some normally undeserving wrestlers would get one over another conference. Willie did the analysis on this (Ranking vs Allocations) and we all knew it would be a turkey shoot with them.

Has any team ever sent 10 qualifiers and left with 0 AA's?

I do remember that Rutgers had 10 qualifiers in 2016 and only 2 AA'd. I remember this because I got banned from the Rutgers board for congratulating them after all 10 qualifiers combined finished with less points than Zain.

 

[jrod65]

Somebody would need to go back and dig up the list of those eligible for an at large.

Off the top of my head: Ed Scott could've gone too.

But considering how many low seeds placed this year -- including a 33 seed alternate replacement -- limiting snubs to "ranked guys" isn't the entire story.

Agree, 100%. I was just interested if there were a few guys that really stood out that missed the tourny.


*also(like many others on here) my condolences to you and your family during these difficult times of loss. From what I have read, it appears that you have a strong family bond that will help each other work through the many rough days ahead.

 

[El-Jefe]

I do remember that Rutgers had 10 qualifiers in 2016 and only 2 AA'd. I remember this because I got banned from the Rutgers board for congratulating them after all 10 qualifiers combined finished with less points than Zain.

Savage.

Must confess, you made me look it up. 4 years of Zain almost tied 5 years of Rutgers.

2014 -- Zain 12.0, Rutger 11.5
2015 -- Zain shirt, Rutger 9.5
2016 -- Zain 28.5, Rutger 30.0
2017 -- Zain 28.0, Rutger 24.5
2018 -- Zain 25.0, Rutger 42.5
5-yr total -- Zain 93.5, Rutger 118.0

Over that period (Ashnault + Cruiseliner Nick) = 51.0 of the 118.0 pts.

 

[Psalm 1 guy]

Roar, Thanks for doing this research. Retirement Roar is even more impressive as a contributor to this Board : ) Having Marinelli and Berge get injured early in the tourney and not even achieve AA status needs to also be mentioned. I can't remember if any additional top tier B1G wrestlers were injured during the tournament.