Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

If they indeed do break the record, the Hawkeye report room will explode. There was already a topic where they discussed taking second to Penn St, which they figured, but absolutely don’t want them to break the most points scored record. 

  • Fire 1
Posted
2 minutes ago, MizzouFan01 said:

If they indeed do break the record, the Hawkeye report room will explode. There was already a topic where they discussed taking second to Penn St, which they figured, but absolutely don’t want them to break the most points scored record. 

Interesting. Last time I checked there was still a delusional fantasy they had a shot to win it all

I Don't Agree With What I Posted

Posted

If they wrestle out of their minds they will be lucky to get within 30 points of the record, which won't even put them in the top 10. To say SI is a shadow of its old self is among the understatements of the year.

  • Fire 3

Drowning in data, but thirsting for knowledge

Posted

I think they can come close, maybe do it. 

I wouldn’t be shocked at all to see them get 6 champs - that’s about 135, potentially a point or two more depending on bonus.

Also wouldn’t be shocked to see Bartlett make the finals: ~18

Then would only need ~17 more between Facundo and Van Ness.

 

Posted
1 hour ago, PortaJohn said:

Interesting. Last time I checked there was still a delusional fantasy they had a shot to win it all

This is not true.  You might find a guy or two, but that's it. 

55 minutes ago, 1032004 said:

I think they can come close, maybe do it. 

I wouldn’t be shocked at all to see them get 6 champs - that’s about 135, potentially a point or two more depending on bonus.

Also wouldn’t be shocked to see Bartlett make the finals: ~18

Then would only need ~17 more between Facundo and Van Ness.

 

6 Champs is 120 points.  None of their guys are huge bonus guys (although RBY is better this year).  Bartlett is more likely go lose in the quarters than make the finals, he just doesn't have any offense.

 

Honestly, I would be shocked if Penn State threatened their own team record, let alone the NCAA team record.

 

That said, I think I read somewhere that the record is slightly inflated based on the current scoring system.

Posted
1 hour ago, 1032004 said:

I think they can come close, maybe do it. 

I wouldn’t be shocked at all to see them get 6 champs - that’s about 135, potentially a point or two more depending on bonus.

Also wouldn’t be shocked to see Bartlett make the finals: ~18

Then would only need ~17 more between Facundo and Van Ness.

 

I am a massive PSU fan and I would take the under on every one of those numbers.

Drowning in data, but thirsting for knowledge

Posted
14 minutes ago, VakAttack said:

 

That said, I think I read somewhere that the record is slightly inflated based on the current scoring system.

I think it may be the opposite.

In 1997 you only got 1.5 points for a TF if you scored back points. If you led by 15 without back points, it was a match termination and only worth 1 team point.

Also third through eighth were worth less then (9, 7, 5, 3, 2, 1) than they are now (10, 9, 7, 6, 4, 3).

But @gimpeltf would be best to weigh in on this.

Drowning in data, but thirsting for knowledge

Posted
4 minutes ago, Wrestleknownothing said:

I think it may be the opposite.

In 1997 you only got 1.5 points for a TF if you scored back points. If you led by 15 without back points, it was a match termination and only worth 1 team point.

Also third through eighth were worth less then (9, 7, 5, 3, 2, 1) than they are now (10, 9, 7, 6, 4, 3).

But @gimpeltf would be best to weigh in on this.

but you could re compute 1997 with current scoring rules ...

2BPE 11/17/24 SMC

Posted
7 minutes ago, Wrestleknownothing said:

I think it may be the opposite.

In 1997 you only got 1.5 points for a TF if you scored back points. If you led by 15 without back points, it was a match termination and only worth 1 team point.

Also third through eighth were worth less then (9, 7, 5, 3, 2, 1) than they are now (10, 9, 7, 6, 4, 3).

But @gimpeltf would be best to weigh in on this.

They changed to the above in 2000 leading to Minnesota winning in 2001 without a finalist.

I didn't think it was the best way to solve the problem since this increased the number of times that a lower placer could outscore a higher one.

I would have just used the HS system- increasing the advancement points. This also increases points by non-placers.

But it worked and did what they wanted which was to lessen the impact of a top heavy team.

Posted (edited)
39 minutes ago, VakAttack said:

6 Champs is 120 points.  None of their guys are huge bonus guys (although RBY is better this year).  Bartlett is more likely go lose in the quarters than make the finals, he just doesn't have any offense.

 

Honestly, I would be shocked if Penn State threatened their own team record, let alone the NCAA team record.

 

That said, I think I read somewhere that the record is slightly inflated based on the current scoring system.

135 is an average of 22.5.  Their 4 returning champs averaged 22.4 last year.

Even if Bartlett takes 4th or 5th, Facundo and Van Ness could outperform what I said too.

Obviously that’s best case scenario (although I honestly wouldn’t be completely shocked to see them have 7 champs), but that happens pretty often with PSU.  Just saying I think there’s a path and for example I think them breaking the record is more likely than them losing…

What’s their own team record?

Edited by 1032004
Posted
25 minutes ago, Wrestleknownothing said:

I am a massive PSU fan and I would take the under on every one of those numbers.

I probably would too, just saying I think it’s within the realm of possibility 

Posted

6 champs sounds like a stretch. I am expecting PSU to win 2 or 3 weights though they have a habit of pulling off some tournament magic every year. Of course that article pumps up PSU's chances, it was a puff piece written for the Penn State fan blog and not a real SI sports writer.

Posted
11 minutes ago, 1032004 said:

135 is an average of 22.5.  Their 4 returning champs averaged 22.4 last year.

Even if Bartlett takes 4th or 5th, Facundo and Van Ness could outperform what I said too.

Obviously that’s best case scenario (although I honestly wouldn’t be completely shocked to see them have 7 champs), but that happens pretty often with PSU.  Just saying I think there’s a path and for example I think them breaking the record is more likely than them losing…

What’s their own team record?

146.5 in 2017

Drowning in data, but thirsting for knowledge

Posted
1 minute ago, CHROMEBIRD said:

6 champs sounds like a stretch. I am expecting PSU to win 2 or 3 weights though they have a habit of pulling off some tournament magic every year. Of course that article pumps up PSU's chances, it was a puff piece written for the Penn State fan blog and not a real SI sports writer.

No such thing anymore.

Drowning in data, but thirsting for knowledge

Posted
1 minute ago, Wrestleknownothing said:

146.5 in 2017

Well depending on your definition of “threatened,” I certainly think they can at least come close to that without much overperforming.

More realistic predictions:

RBY, Starocci and Brooks - 23 each 

Kerk - 20

Dean - 18

Haines - 15

Bartlett - 12

Facundo - 5

Van Ness - 5

Total 144

 

 

Posted

Hypothetical - Curious with the braniacs on this board how the scoring in 1997 breaks down to a scenario with PSU on par with similar placement

1997 Iowa 170 points

National champions: 
Jesse Whitmer (118 pounds) - RBY(133)
Mark Ironside (134 pounds) - Starrocci (174)
Lincoln McIlravy (150 pounds) - Brooks (184)
Joe Williams (158 pounds)  - Dean (197)
Lee Fullhart (190 pounds)  - Kerk ( Hvwt)

All-Americans: 
Mike Mena (2nd, 126 pounds) - Haines (157)
Kasey Gilliss (6th, 142 pounds) Facundo (165)
Mike Uker (5th, 167 pounds)  Bartlett (141)

----------------------------- Shayne Van Ness (R12)

I Don't Agree With What I Posted

Posted
5 minutes ago, PortaJohn said:

Hypothetical - Curious with the braniacs on this board how the scoring in 1997 breaks down to a scenario with PSU on par with similar placement

1997 Iowa 170 points

National champions: 
Jesse Whitmer (118 pounds) - RBY(133)
Mark Ironside (134 pounds) - Starrocci (174)
Lincoln McIlravy (150 pounds) - Brooks (184)
Joe Williams (158 pounds)  - Dean (197)
Lee Fullhart (190 pounds)  - Kerk ( Hvwt)

All-Americans: 
Mike Mena (2nd, 126 pounds) - Haines (157)
Kasey Gilliss (6th, 142 pounds) Facundo (165)
Mike Uker (5th, 167 pounds)  Bartlett (141)

----------------------------- Shayne Van Ness (R12)

PSU scores 5 more placement points plus Van Ness' 1.5 to 2.

The issue PSU would still have is they are not a big bonus point team. Iowa scored 34 bonus points in 97. PSU will get about half of that.

Drowning in data, but thirsting for knowledge

Posted (edited)
6 minutes ago, Wrestleknownothing said:

PSU scores 5 more placement points plus Van Ness' 1.5 to 2.

The issue PSU would still have is they are not a big bonus point team. Iowa scored 34 bonus points in 97. PSU will get about half of that.

Do you have the breakdown from that year?  And how scoring in '97 differentiates from today?  Fun topic

Edited by PortaJohn

I Don't Agree With What I Posted

Posted
1 minute ago, Wrestleknownothing said:

No, I just took a look at the brackets on Wrestlingstats.

Edited my post after you responded.  Would be interesting to see those stats from '97 and compare them to how scoring is applied currently

I Don't Agree With What I Posted

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...