NCAA seeds discussions (brackets out @8 pm)

[McScoreley]

Annual reminder: Nomad (and @jmadden1998 here) is just running math. There's nothing subjective here. It was also designed to seed everyone, not just the Top 5.

We can hate wrestling Gable is why Kerk is behind Trephan (since otherwise, conferences and W % is split and Kerk is ahead) but that is the reason and now there is room (but no guarantee) for humans to change something at their discretion. Daton finished ahead of RBY in the 2023 matrix and that was overruled based on previous year results.

 

[diggerpup]

It's much easier to just relax & wait until the actual brackets are released Wednesday - versus running matrix math and/or working yourself into a raging tizzy.

Exhibit A: CJFisJoePall

Story Moral: "Don't worry about things you have no control over." However they slice it, PSU will win by 50+ points.

 

[donboy6499]

Annual reminder: Nomad (and @jmadden1998 here) is just running math. There's nothing subjective here. It was also designed to seed everyone, not just the Top 5.

We can hate wrestling Gable is why Kerk is behind Trephan (since otherwise, conferences and W % is split and Kerk is ahead) but that is the reason and now there is room (but no guarantee) for humans to change something at their discretion. Daton finished ahead of RBY in the 2023 matrix and that was overruled based on previous year results.

My prediction: they overrule at 125, 141, 184, and 197 the top line seed.

They’ll also keep Kerk and Gable away from each other until the finals.

 

[5q]

Would be ashame to pit gable and Kerk in the semis

 

[Kale_yeah]

When in doubt big 10 should count for something, all conferences are not equal. Kerk should be #2 only loss is to the #1 and an all time great. Also alerez can't be rank to low because he is a national champ 5 or 6 would be fair.

 

[johnstownsteel]

I think Kerk gets the 3 seed.

 

[bwfight]

It's much easier to just relax & wait until the actual brackets are released Wednesday - versus running matrix math and/or working yourself into a raging tizzy.

Exhibit A: CJFisJoePall

Story Moral: "Don't worry about things you have no control over." However they slice it, PSU will win by 50+ points.

I predict . . . Total domination and another recruiting documentary demonstrating why the best of the best choose PSU, and get better.

Concurrently, there will be another recruiting documentary running that illustrates good wrestlers who choose Iowa to receive money bags will usually get worse and forfeit greatness.

I like this juxtaposition because it highlights the growing chasm between the two programs. 🤩

 

[CJFisJoePaII]

It's much easier to just relax & wait until the actual brackets are released Wednesday - versus running matrix math and/or working yourself into a raging tizzy.

Exhibit A: CJFisJoePall

Story Moral: "Don't worry about things you have no control over." However they slice it, PSU will win by 50+ points.

Not over-reacting in any fashion - it really doesn't matter that much whether you're 1 or 2. However, it's kind of inane to build a model that is supposed to be the predictive strength of each wrestler in the field and not include one of the most important statistics - the wrestler's actual record versus the field. How is "RPI" (which each wrestler has zero control over) more important than actual record versus the field. How is a Coach's biased opinion more important than the wrestler's actual record against the field?

 

[El-Jefe]

It's much easier to just relax & wait until the actual brackets are released Wednesday - versus running matrix math and/or working yourself into a raging tizzy.

Exhibit A: CJFisJoePall

Story Moral: "Don't worry about things you have no control over." However they slice it, PSU will win by 50+ points.

As you were saying ...

 

[PSUer1989]

It's a formula based on multiple criteria.

Head to head 25
Quality wins 20
Conference tournament placement 15
win% 10
common opponent 10
Coaches rank 10
RPI 10

Hardy is ranked #1 in the coaches poll, Bartlett is #2, Hardy get 10 points. Hardy is #4 in RPI, Bartlett is #5, Hardy gets 10 more points. Hardy finished 1st at Big 10's. Bartlett finished 3rd. Hardy gets 15 points. Bartlett beat Hardy. Bartlett gets 25 points. Bartlett has a better win%. Bartlett gets 10 points. They are even with 35 points each and there is 20 left for quality wins and 10 for common opponents. Nomad has run the numbers and Hardy gets more quality win points so he gets 15 points and Bartlett gets 5. Now it's 50 for Hardy and 40 for Bartlett. They split 5 each for common opponents and Hardy's total is 55 and Bartlett's is 45. The matrix seeds Hardy higher than Bartlett

When you run the formula, Hardy gets more of the pie when compared to each of the other 32 qualifiers at the weight. This is how the NCAA seeds wrestlers. They do have discretion to move a competitor up to 3 seeds higher or lower.

“Conference champions” all get the same 15%? It doesn’t make sense to get the same credit for beating 2 guys to win the PAC -4 as it does to go through the Big Ten Tournament

 

[El-Jefe]

Annual reminder: Nomad (and @jmadden1998 here) is just running math. There's nothing subjective here. It was also designed to seed everyone, not just the Top 5.

We can hate wrestling Gable is why Kerk is behind Trephan (since otherwise, conferences and W % is split and Kerk is ahead) but that is the reason and now there is room (but no guarantee) for humans to change something at their discretion. Daton finished ahead of RBY in the 2023 matrix and that was overruled based on previous year results.

With Lobdell it's sometimes hard to tell when he's purely running math vs shitposting. Because he does the latter a lot.

For example, 141. He's probably right about the very top seeds. Alirez at 8? Maybe he's right, but it screams LOOK AT ME.

 

[El-Jefe]

“Conference champions” all get the same 15%? It doesn’t make sense to get the same credit for beating 2 guys to win the PAC -4 as it does to go through the Big Ten Tournament

Yes. In the sim matchup, Trevor Tinker beats Kerk 15-0 in this category. (Kerk obliterates him in every other category.)

 

[El-Jefe]

When in doubt big 10 should count for something, all conferences are not equal. Kerk should be #2 only loss is to the #1 and an all time great. Also alerez can't be rank to low because he is a national champ 5 or 6 would be fair.

Alirez should get the seed that matches his performance relative to the field this year. Last year should have nothing to do with it.

Bryce Meredith got the 10 seed in 2017, after being a national finalist in 2016.

 

[PSUer1989]

Yes. In the sim matchup, Trevor Tinker beats Kerk 15-0 in this category. (Kerk obliterates him in every other category.)

 

[El-Jefe]

Wait So the semi would be gable vs Kerk?

If they go strictly by the math, 1 Hendrickson, 2 Steveson, 3 Trumble, 4 Kerk.

 

[82bordeaux]

Also alerez can't be rank to low because he is a national champ 5 or 6 would be fair.

Carter was a three time NCAA champ at #9

 

[pish69]

I think Kerk gets the 3 seed.

He will. If the committee doesn’t move Kerk to 3 in this one than don’t even waste time moving anyone else around and just go by the stupid matrix. (I like the matrix, but can’t stand the conference placement weight).

I’d also like to see committee split up conference guys as much as possible. No one wants to see Keck/Plott for the millionth time

 

[El-Jefe]

He will. If the committee doesn’t move Kerk to 3 in this one than don’t even waste time moving anyone else around and just go by the stupid matrix. (I like the matrix, but can’t stand the conference placement weight).

I’d also like to see committee split up conference guys as much as possible. No one wants to see Keck/Plott for the millionth time

Not picking on you here, just the sentiment that's been posted by several people: why do we care about Kerk being specifically the 3? Isn't the real point separating him from Steveson? Otherwise, we're saying we'd be perfectly happy with a Steveson-Kerk semi as long as Kerk gets the number we want.

To the other point: while that makes sense, don't hold your breath. NCAA did not separate Zain and Stieber when they had an undefeated conference champ (Carter) at 4. They stuck with the math. And separating Keckeisen from Plott isn't nearly as compelling.

 

[Reslo]

When in doubt big 10 should count for something, all conferences are not equal. Kerk should be #2 only loss is to the #1 and an all time great. Also alerez can't be rank to low because he is a national champ 5 or 6 would be fair.

Previous years are not relevant. Starocci was seeded 9th last season after being a 3X champ.

 

[pish69]

Not picking on you here, just the sentiment that's been posted by several people: why do we care about Kerk being specifically the 3? Isn't the real point separating him from Steveson? Otherwise, we're saying we'd be perfectly happy with a Steveson-Kerk semi as long as Kerk gets the number we want.

To the other point: while that makes sense, don't hold your breath. NCAA did not separate Zain and Stieber when they had an undefeated conference champ (Carter) at 4. They stuck with the math. And separating Keckeisen from Plott isn't nearly as compelling.

Paragraph 1..the point is when you have the clear 1 and 2 guys in country in same conference, the committee needs to intervene to put opposite side (and I believe that will be proven tonight)

Paragraph 2..I realize in the past they haven’t done this as much as they should, I just think it’s something they need to start doing more of.

My overall point is, if the committee not going to do these things, then why have one?

 

[pawrestlersintn]

Maybe they should use Wrestlestat rankings for seeding.

 

[pish69]

Previous years are not relevant. Starocci was seeded 9th last season after being a 3X champ.

Even though it was a joke what they did to Star last year these aren’t apples to apples. Alirez took 3rd at conference, Carter took 2 losses and didn’t place at conference tournament because of the defaults

 

[donboy6499]

Paragraph 1..the point is when you have the clear 1 and 2 guys in country in same conference, the committee needs to intervene to put opposite side (and I believe that will be proven tonight)

Paragraph 2..I realize in the past they haven’t done this as much as they should, I just think it’s something they need to start doing more of.

My overall point is, if the committee not going to do these things, then why have one?

I think your last point is why we will see intervention at several weights. I am actually at war with 2 conflicting thoughts:

The committee will want to intervene to justify its existence.

The committee will not want to be seen as giving preferential treatment to Penn State (or a lesser extent, the few power programs).

But intervention here probably means being seen as helping Penn State at 125, 141, 184, and HW. Without even knowing the makeup of the committee, I know that will weigh on their minds.

Guess a 3rd option can be intervene but be cognizant of how it looks, thus intentionally not moving, say, Kerk away from GS.

 

[wrestlingfan22]

Lock Haven has 5 from PA.

View embedded media

pitt has 6 from PA 5 WPIAL

 

[El-Jefe]

Paragraph 1..the point is when you have the clear 1 and 2 guys in country in same conference, the committee needs to intervene to put opposite side (and I believe that will be proven tonight)

Paragraph 2..I realize in the past they haven’t done this as much as they should, I just think it’s something they need to start doing more of.

My overall point is, if the committee not going to do these things, then why have one?

The committee needs to intervene as little as is truly necessary.

If people hate seeding now, just wait until it becomes more subjective.

As a reminder: Tom Ryan was on the NCAA Wrestling Committee (IIRC 2016-2018). Would you trust him to move seeds around?

 

[johnstownsteel]

Not picking on you here, just the sentiment that's been posted by several people: why do we care about Kerk being specifically the 3? Isn't the real point separating him from Steveson? Otherwise, we're saying we'd be perfectly happy with a Steveson-Kerk semi as long as Kerk gets the number we want.

To the other point: while that makes sense, don't hold your breath. NCAA did not separate Zain and Stieber when they had an undefeated conference champ (Carter) at 4. They stuck with the math. And separating Keckeisen from Plott isn't nearly as compelling.

Yeah, let the matrix spit put Gable as the two seed. Let the matrix prove itself to be a shitty way to seed without allowing some sort of accepted manipulation like common sense.

 

[Psufan2427]

Not picking on you here, just the sentiment that's been posted by several people: why do we care about Kerk being specifically the 3? Isn't the real point separating him from Steveson? Otherwise, we're saying we'd be perfectly happy with a Steveson-Kerk semi as long as Kerk gets the number we want.

To the other point: while that makes sense, don't hold your breath. NCAA did not separate Zain and Stieber when they had an undefeated conference champ (Carter) at 4. They stuck with the math. And separating Keckeisen from Plott isn't nearly as compelling.

To be fair Carter missed most of that season with like a broken elbow , most people thought his season was over and he ended up coming back for ACCs,he only had 12/13 matches going into ncaa

 

[tullfan68]

“Conference champions” all get the same 15%? It doesn’t make sense to get the same credit for beating 2 guys to win the PAC -4 as it does to go through the Big Ten Tournament

LOL certainly cant go by coaches ranking tom is buying all their rankings!

 

[johnstownsteel]

I wouldn't trust Tom Ryan but maybe the aggregate of all the coaches. I wonder how things would look if the coaches seeded the top four spots for each weight. The rest of the bracket is filled in by the current matrix.

 

[El-Jefe]

Yeah, let the matrix spit put Gable as the two seed. Let the matrix prove itself to be a shitty way to seed without allowing some sort of accepted manipulation like common sense.

NCAA has common sense?

 

[johnstownsteel]

NCAA has common sense?

I would think the coaches would but probably not.

 

[RoarLions1]

Seems all but one in this thread have moved on from the "math" and the set criteria. Here's the SUBJECTIVE language. Question is, how would you use it to move any of the wrestlers if the eyeball test gives the NCAA pause? Frankly, I don't see much in the language below. I do hope the NCAA Wrestling Committee is transparent if they use subjective criteria.

SUBJECTIVE CRITERIA
The committee may also consider the following subjective measures to supplement established selection and seeding criteria:
● Bad Losses
● Outside the top 30 CR and/or 30 RPI
● Conference Champion
● Performance in last five matches
● Number of Injury default or medical forfeits wins/losses
● Best quality win
● Wrestler availability (injured or medically unable to compete)

 

[El-Jefe]

I wouldn't trust Tom Ryan but maybe the aggregate of all the coaches. I wonder how things would look if the coaches seeded the top four spots for each weight. The rest of the bracket is filled in by the current matrix.

The NCAA Wrestling Committee is a mix of coaches and administrators.

But in any case, weren't we told just this week that coaches rank is a terrible seeding criterion because of the inherent conflict? But now we should trust their common sense.

NCAA doesn't trust their common sense either, which is the reason for the simulation and for the subjective criteria Roar posted above.

Here's the other conflict: we all know Steveson is the best HWT. But he didn't get an RPI -- meaning, he didn't wrestle a full season. We can't say he earned the 1 seed this year and complain about guys not wrestling a full season.

 

[johnstownsteel]

The NCAA Wrestling Committee is a mix of coaches and administrators.

But in any case, weren't we told just this week that coaches rank is a terrible seeding criterion because of the inherent conflict? But now we should trust their common sense.

NCAA doesn't trust their common sense either, which is the reason for the simulation and for the subjective criteria Roar posted above.

Here's the other conflict: we all know Steveson is the best HWT. But he didn't get an RPI -- meaning, he didn't wrestle a full season. We can't say he earned the 1 seed this year and complain about guys not wrestling a full season.

You make fair points. In my opinion though, If the 70 or how ever many d1 coaches there are can't arrive at a more accurate top 4 seeds over a computer system, then college wrestling doesn't deserve any better than it already has. They are suppose to be the most knowledgeable people in the sport. Did you see any glaring mistakes for the top 4 in each weight in their latest rankings?

 

[pish69]

You make fair points. In my opinion though, If the 70 or how ever many d1 coaches there are can't arrive at a more accurate top 4 seeds over a computer system, then college wrestling doesn't deserve any better than it already has. They are suppose to be the most knowledgeable people in the sport. Did you see any glaring mistakes for the top 4 in each weight in their latest rankings?

I love your propsal..let coaches rank do top 4 and use the matrix with no subjectivity for the rest.

Ultimately getting top 4 correct is most important for a bracket. Mekhi and Griffith wouldn't have gotten screwed last year in the ridiculous seeded bracket

 

[west2east]

If they go strictly by the math, 1 Hendrickson, 2 Steveson, 3 Trumble, 4 Kerk.

I haven't ran the numbers yet for HWT. What were the records for those 4 in the matrix

 

[Cstroke]

I haven't ran the numbers yet for HWT. What were the records for those 4 in the matrix

 

[El-Jefe]

You make fair points. In my opinion though, If the 70 or how ever many d1 coaches there are can't arrive at a more accurate top 4 seeds over a computer system, then college wrestling doesn't deserve any better than it already has. They are suppose to be the most knowledgeable people in the sport. Did you see any glaring mistakes for the top 4 in each weight in their latest rankings?

Glaring mistakes? I dunno ... IMO Kharchla and Pinto are both better than Thompson, and Schultz is better than Trephan -- for that matter, objectively Trumble is, otherwise Trephan would still be in Raleigh. Are those glaring? Even with Trumble, some will argue Trephan was undefeated.

But some obvious inconsistencies. Ramos and Hardy both 1, Lilledahl and Beau both 2.

And if Hardy is the 1, then why is Happel behind Beau? I think Beau is better, but Happel did win a tough conference. Both beat Hardy H2H. What is the justification for Hardy that doesn't apply to Happel?

 

[82bordeaux]

You make fair points. In my opinion though, If the 70 or how ever many d1 coaches there are can't arrive at a more accurate top 4 seeds over a computer system, then college wrestling doesn't deserve any better than it already has. They are suppose to be the most knowledgeable people in the sport. Did you see any glaring mistakes for the top 4 in each weight in their latest rankings?

Believe it or not, most of us are dialed in better to other team's wrestlers than the coaches. They are very myopic to their own wrestlers.

 

[El-Jefe]

I wouldn't trust Tom Ryan but maybe the aggregate of all the coaches. I wonder how things would look if the coaches seeded the top four spots for each weight. The rest of the bracket is filled in by the current matrix.

Not a bad idea. I might go to 5 or 6, which would capture Alirez.

One qualification: should see how well coaches poll correlated to results in recent years.

This year the final coaches poll seems pretty good, at least at the top. Not sure if thar's consistently true or if 2025 is a blip.