One of the most interesting things to watch at NCAAs..

[BruceyB]

One of the things I am most curious to see play out over the next few days is how OSU and PSU perform relative to seed. Our dear friend WKN has the numbers about how each of the big programs perform year to year when it comes to this, and PSU is by far the best at performing closest to their seeds year after year. One big factor in PSU's stretch of dominance is that historically they rarely have individuals with bad NCAA tournaments. 

Last year, OSU had a very impressive showing at NCAAs by putting 6 in the quarters, 4 in the semis, 3 in the finals, and having two Champions. Of Oklahoma State's 9 qualifiers, 6 wrestled to their seed or better.

Last year, Penn State put all 10 wrestlers into the quarters, had 7 in the semis, and just 3 in the finals. Of Penn State's 10 qualifiers, 4 wrestled to or above seed (it is worth noting that 8 of their 10 wrestlers finished inside the top 3, so those that "underperformed" didn't miss by much).

It feels like PSU is getting closer and closer to having all 10 starting wrestlers being legitimate contenders for a national title. If OKST hopes to catch PSU for a team title in the next few years, two things need to happen.

1. PSU's unbelievable winning percentage in the semis needs to come back closer to the field average. It's going to be hard to beat a team that is putting 5-6 guys in the finals every year.

2. Oklahoma State needs to have guys perform their best at NCAAs in a way similar to how PSU has managed. Last year they won 3 of 4 in the semis. Was this a fluke or a sign of things to come?

Can Oklahoma State continue what they did at last year's NCAAs and have several guys at their best when it matters most? And was PSU's 3-4 record in the semis last year the start of a regression to the mean or was it just an anomaly? 

 

[Eagle26]

Well, PSU has 7 number 1 seeds, so it’s an incredibly high standard for them to just live up to their seeds. If they get 6 champs, it’s an unprecedented performance but technically “under performing” based on seeds. 

[ionel]

3 minutes ago, Eagle26 said:

Well, PSU has 7 number 1 seeds, so it’s an incredibly high standard for them to just live up to their seeds. If they get 6 champs, it’s an unprecedented performance but technically “under performing” based on seeds. 

But Wkn says #1 seeds only win 47% of the time so they should only get 3 champs.  

[Eagle26]

5 minutes ago, ionel said:

But Wkn says #1 seeds only win 47% of the time so they should only get 3 champs.  

But we are talking performance relative to seed so anything less than 7 is bad by that metric. 
 

obviously in reality I think most would agree 5 is a good performance for them and 6+ would be amazing. 3 would certainly be a disappointment. 

[ionel]

3 minutes ago, Eagle26 said:

3 would certainly be a disappointment. 

I would not be disappointed.  

Edited March 19 by ionel

[BruceyB]

11 minutes ago, Eagle26 said:

Well, PSU has 7 number 1 seeds, so it’s an incredibly high standard for them to just live up to their seeds. If they get 6 champs, it’s an unprecedented performance but technically “under performing” based on seeds. 

Out of the top 8 seeds, I'd bet that the #1 seed wrestles to seed more often than any of the others.

[ionel]

@MPhillips can you light up the Wkn signal?

[MPhillips]

14 minutes ago, ionel said:

But Wkn says #1 seeds only win 47% of the time

Does Wkn say that or do the number say that...

[BruceyB]

2 minutes ago, Eagle26 said:

But we are talking performance relative to seed so anything less than 7 is bad by that metric. 
 

obviously in reality I think most would agree 5 is a good performance for them and 6+ would be amazing. 3 would certainly be a disappointment. 

If Penn State put all 7 in the finals and had 0 champs, I wouldn't say that is a bad performance relative to seed. Having 7 guys wrestle within 1 place of their seed is very, very good. Last year, PSU wrestled very, very good other than their winning percentage in the semis (which we aren't accustomed to seeing).

[MPhillips]

1 minute ago, ionel said:

@MPhillips can you light up the Wkn signal?

Not looking like I can...

 

[ionel]

5 minutes ago, MPhillips said:

Does Wkn say that or do the number say that...

Wkn says the numbers say that.   

[MPhillips]

Just now, ionel said:

Wkn says the numbers say that.   

He's sneaky. What do you want from me...

[ionel]

17 minutes ago, MPhillips said:

He's sneaky. What do you want from me...

Light up the signal ... you've done it before.  

 

PS: I found Wkn's post where he said the 47% but Bob won't let me post the image ... says ive exceeded my limits that scoundrel.   

 

BTW if you aint gonna do anything then pass the vodka ... please.   

Edited March 19 by ionel

[MPhillips]

1 minute ago, ionel said:

that scoundrel.   

Rapscallion even...

 

@Wrestleknownothing 

[GreatWhiteNorth]

1 hour ago, BruceyB said:

...Can Oklahoma State continue what they did at last year's NCAAs and have several guys at their best when it matters most? And was PSU's 3-4 record in the semis last year the start of a regression to the mean or was it just an anomaly? 

 

Even if some PSU and OkSt folks aren't necessarily hardcore wrestling fans - what you've described is more than enough to promote them tuning in.

I see OkSt surprising PSU folks with impressive performances.

It is going to be a hootenanny ... and then some.

Stats? We don't need no stinkin' stats. I don't think what we're about to witness is predictable.

It's going to be chaos, in the best possible way.

[Psalm 1 guy]

2 hours ago, ionel said:

But Wkn says #1 seeds only win 47% of the time so they should only get 3 champs.  

I did find these two quotes from WKN on The Wrestling Room:

When PSU is the higher seed under Sanderson they are 424 - 59 (87.8%). Of course the field is 4,064 - 3,658 when the higher seed (52.6%).

Now here is the crazy stat, since 2010 when the #1 seed meets the #2 seed in the final, the #1 seed wins 67.6% of the time (25 - 12) when neither are from PSU. But when PSU is the #1 seed the win percentage jumps to 92.3% (12 -1).

 

[dragit]

46 minutes ago, Psalm 1 guy said:

 Of course the field is 4,064 - 3,658 when the higher seed (52.6%).

 

That's all matches over many years?  Much lower than I would have thought.  Just think about top 4 seeds in the first two rounds, and the 5-8 seeds in the first round, and the numbers you'd think they'd roll up.  

[lu_alum]

59 minutes ago, Psalm 1 guy said:

Of course the field is 4,064 - 3,658 when the higher seed (52.6%).

 

As @dragit inquires... How far back does the analysis reach? Seeding the full 33-man bracket began in 2019.  The likelihood of upsets by unseeded wrestlers was much greater prior to 2019.

• From 2014-2018, the top 16 were seeded.
• From 1979-2014, the top 12 were seeded.

There was also a timeframe that wrestlers from the same conference were separated to the QFs, which introduced "phantom seeds" for many B1G wrestlers that were not in the top 12 or 16 at a particular weight.

[dragit]

8 minutes ago, lu_alum said:

As @dragit inquires... How far back does the analysis reach? Seeding the full 33-man bracket began in 2019.  The likelihood of upsets by unseeded wrestlers was much greater prior to 2019.

• From 2014-2018, the top 16 were seeded.
• From 1979-2014, the top 12 were seeded.

There was also a timeframe that wrestlers from the same conference were separated to the QFs, which introduced "phantom seeds" for many B1G wrestlers that were not in the top 12 or 16 at a particular weight.

Good points.  But even in the earlier years, wouldn't you think that, for instance, the top 4 seeds in the first two rounds would have very high winning percentages?  That's a lot of matches.  Which I would think would skew the winning percentage above just 52%?

[Eagle26]

7 hours ago, BruceyB said:

If Penn State put all 7 in the finals and had 0 champs, I wouldn't say that is a bad performance relative to seed. Having 7 guys wrestle within 1 place of their seed is very, very good. Last year, PSU wrestled very, very good other than their winning percentage in the semis (which we aren't accustomed to seeing).

Relative to seed it’s probably not bad, but I think 7 guys finishing one spot below their seed is not “very, very good”. Obviously, Penn State fans would be very disappointed with that result. Especially given the stats we have seen with their 92% win rate of #1s in the finals. 

[BruceyB]

4 hours ago, Eagle26 said:

Relative to seed it’s probably not bad, but I think 7 guys finishing one spot below their seed is not “very, very good”. Obviously, Penn State fans would be very disappointed with that result. Especially given the stats we have seen with their 92% win rate of #1s in the finals. 

Relative to seed I think it's very good. Relative to expectation is a different conversation.

[MPhillips]

"It's all relative."

[Wrestleknownothing]

On 3/18/2026 at 10:02 PM, ionel said:

But Wkn says #1 seeds only win 47% of the time so they should only get 3 champs.  

Update: from 2010 - 2026 #1 seeds win 50.6% of the time.

[ionel]

54 minutes ago, Wrestleknownothing said:

Update: from 2010 - 2026 #1 seeds win 50.6% of the time.

What's the true Fr win % now? 

[ionel]

On 3/19/2026 at 9:20 AM, MPhillips said:

"It's all relative."

... for the dummies?  ..............................