Wyatt Hendrickson of Air Force is flying along (well below the Hodge radar)

[SocraTease]

I'm curious why Wyatt Hendrickson isn't being talked about and isn't even included in some of the Hodge rankings (e.g., FLO).  

 

Here are the Hodge criteria from the NCAA wrestling website:

 

Originally created to celebrate the pin in college wrestling, the Dan Hodge Trophy is based on seven criteria including record, number of pins, dominance, past credentials, quality of competition, sportsmanship/citizenship and heart. The trophy is based primarily on the results of a single season, but past accomplishments are considered as well, particularly in years where the competition is tighter. 

 

Hendrickson is 19-0.  

 

He has an 89% bonus rate. 

 

He leads the NCAA Division I in pins again this year. It's something like 15 and counting.  He's also won the Schalles Award for most pins the last two years, and he will likely win it again.  None of the other Hodge candidates are even close to those number of pins. He was the most dominant wrestler statistically the last two years and will probably be so this year.

 

He won the U23 Worlds at 125K in fall 2023. Last season, he was 31-2 and only lost to the NCAA champ and runner up.  The prior seasons he was 26-2.

 

Yes, he was hammered by Kerkviliet at the All Star match (while likely injured), but I don't believe that counts for Hodge.  

 

On sheer statistical evidence, a case could even be made that he should be ranked first.

 

And, no I don't expect him to win 285, but the guy's numbers are impressive.  If somehow he would win out he has to be in the Hodge conversation.

[lu_alum]

22 minutes ago, SocraTease said:

He won the U23 Worlds at 125K in fall 2023. Last season, he was 31-2 and only lost to the NCAA champ and runner up.  The prior seasons he was 26-2.

 

 

26-2 is his career Big 12 record.  Nine career losses.

https://goairforcefalcons.com/documents/2024/2/15/2023-24_AF_WR_Stats.pdf?path=wrestling

He lacks cred in the following categories:

Past Credentials:  Not many Hodge winners that are 1x champs.  His NCAA history is R12, R16, 3rd, TBD.  His resume is nowhere near that of the other major candidates. 

Quality of Competition:  His RPI is #13 among 285s.  Given his undefeated record, that doesn't speak much for his competition.

For a little perspective, he's #11 on Flo's P4P rankings.

Edited February 21 by lu_alum

[Pinnacle]

Maybe because Kerkvliet destroyed him at the all star and voters took note. Criteria isn't that big a deal when you hear some guys talk. They are going to vote the way they want to vote.

[SocraTease]

7 minutes ago, Pinnacle said:

Maybe because Kerkvliet destroyed him at the all star and voters took note. Criteria isn't that big a deal when you hear some guys talk. They are going to vote the way they want to vote.

Well, there are criteria for the voting, and they are supposed to be followed or minimally taken into account.  There are criteria for referees as well.  Are you just going to say, the refs can and will do whatever they want to do.?  Same for juries and judges.   It's not (or shouldn't be) a popularity contest but that is the way too many Americans think and act unfortunately.  They think everything from beauty to truth is purely subjective.  

The Hodge was originally created to celebrate and honor guys who pin, and pinning is still one of the top criteria.  Hendrickson does that.  Askren did that.  So did Nolf, Taylor, Nickal and Retherford.  

Far lower down are past achievements.  It's not a career award.  

Edited February 21 by SocraTease

[SocraTease]

Hendrickson has FAR more pins than any of these guys.

He has a far higher dominance score than any of these guys.

He has more wins than any of these guys but two.

I'm not saying he should or will win the Hodge (he very likely won't).  It's just that he deserves consideration at THIS POINt in the season.

 

 Jan 10, 2024 Feb 19, 2024

RANK	NAME	SCHOOL	WEIGHT	YEAR	Previous	RECORD	PINS	BONUS RATE	DOMINANCE SCORE
1	Aaron Brooks	Penn State	197	SR	2	14-0	4	92%	4.92
2	Carter Starocci	Penn State	174	SR	1	11-0	3	90%	4.9
3	Keegan O'Toole	Missouri	165	JR	3	16-0	6	81%	4.81
4	Trent Hidlay	NC State	197	SR	5	21-0	4	85%	4.76
5	Parker Keckeisen	UNI	184	JR	6	19-0	2	78%	5.1
6	Greg Kerkvliet	Penn State	285	SR	4	12-0	1	75%	4.16
7	Ridge Lovett	Nebraska	149	JR	8	21-0	6	61%	4.19
8	Levi Haines	Penn State	157	SO	12	14-0	3	64%	4.28
9	Mitchell Mesenbrink	Penn State	165	FR	NR	17-0	3	70%	4.47
10	Daton Fix	Oklahoma State	133	SR	14	12-0	1	75%	4.16
11	Vinny Zerban	Northern Colorado	157	SO	NR	18-0	2	77%	4.88
12	Ryan Crookham	Lehigh	133	FR	7	14-0	1	64%	3.85
13	Yonger Bastida	Iowa State	285	SR	10	19-0	0	68%	3.89
14	Beau Bartlett	Penn State	141	SR	11	17-0	4	41%	3.88

Edited February 21 by SocraTease

[Wrestleknownothing]

5 minutes ago, SocraTease said:

Hendrickson has FAR more pins than any of these guys.

He has a far higher dominance score than any of these guys.

He has more wins than any of these guys but two.

I'm not saying he should or will win the Hodge (he very likely won't).  It's just that he deserves consideration at THIS POINt in the season.

 

 Jan 10, 2024 Feb 19, 2024

RANK	NAME	SCHOOL	WEIGHT	YEAR	Previous	RECORD	PINS	BONUS RATE	DOMINANCE SCORE
1	Aaron Brooks	Penn State	197	SR	2	14-0	4	92%	4.92
2	Carter Starocci	Penn State	174	SR	1	11-0	3	90%	4.9
3	Keegan O'Toole	Missouri	165	JR	3	16-0	6	81%	4.81
4	Trent Hidlay	NC State	197	SR	5	21-0	4	85%	4.76
5	Parker Keckeisen	UNI	184	JR	6	19-0	2	78%	5.1
6	Greg Kerkvliet	Penn State	285	SR	4	12-0	1	75%	4.16
7	Ridge Lovett	Nebraska	149	JR	8	21-0	6	61%	4.19
8	Levi Haines	Penn State	157	SO	12	14-0	3	64%	4.28
9	Mitchell Mesenbrink	Penn State	165	FR	NR	17-0	3	70%	4.47
10	Daton Fix	Oklahoma State	133	SR	14	12-0	1	75%	4.16
11	Vinny Zerban	Northern Colorado	157	SO	NR	18-0	2	77%	4.88
12	Ryan Crookham	Lehigh	133	FR	7	14-0	1	64%	3.85
13	Yonger Bastida	Iowa State	285	SR	10	19-0	0	68%	3.89
14	Beau Bartlett	Penn State	141	SR	11	17-0	4	41%	3.88

Steveson won with 1 pin.

Pins have been de-emphasized for some time.

[1032004]

I believe Flo includes the All-Star in their rankings, no?

[SocraTease]

11 minutes ago, Wrestleknownothing said:

Steveson won with 1 pin.

Pins have been de-emphasized for some time.

Steveson was an exception to the general rule. Look at the history of Hodge.  Many are big pinners:  Sanderson (3 times), Askren (two times), Taylor (2 times), Retherford (two times), etc.

Last year, Mason Parris had 11 pins.  None of the so-called Hodge candidates this year have anywhere near even that number, except Hendrickson (who is not even on some of the lists).

If the powers-that-be want pinning to be de-emphasized, then revise the Hodge criteria.  

And make sure you check if Dan Hodge has rolled over in his grave.  If you don't want to exhume him, then consult Ben Askren for his thoughts or even Wade Schalles.  They will both chew the cauliflower ears off the wrestling community on this point about pinning.   

 

Edited February 21 by SocraTease

[wrestle87]

23 minutes ago, SocraTease said:

And make sure you check if Dan Hodge has rolled over in his grave.  If you don't want to exhume him, then consult Ben Askren for his thoughts or even Wade Schalles.  They will both chew the cauliflower ears off the wrestling community on this point about pinning.   

You make some great points, but why tf did you put that in your post.  I legit thought it was an add for cauliflower drainage for a second. That’s gnarly.

[ionel]

35 minutes ago, Wrestleknownothing said:

Steveson won with 1 pin.

Pins have been de-emphasized for some time.

What!?  

Edited February 21 by ionel

[SocraTease]

It's my general sense that pins are likely down in number over the past few years.  That is, that they are likely less common occurrences at the NCAA level as a whole.

So, I'm wondering:

1. Is that in fact the case?   What do the statistics actually say over a 3 year period? 5 year period.  10 or 20 year period?

2.  If it is the case, what are the likely or possible reasons (causes)?  More scrambling?  More defensive wrestling?  More emphasis on majors and tech falls?  A change in levels of competition?  Less emphasis by coaches? Something else?

3.  If pins are (or should be) valued as the way to score the most points for a team and as the best and most reliable way to end a match in victory for individuals, what can be done to change this situation or trend if in fact it exist?

To Wrestleknownothing (who seems to know quite a bit), do you have any data on this issue?  

[Wrestleknownothing]

1 hour ago, SocraTease said:

Steveson was an exception to the general rule. Look at the history of Hodge.  Many are big pinners:  Sanderson (3 times), Askren (two times), Taylor (2 times), Retherford (two times), etc.

Last year, Mason Parris had 11 pins.  None of the so-called Hodge candidates this year have anywhere near even that number, except Hendrickson (who is not even on some of the lists).

If the powers-that-be want pinning to be de-emphasized, then revise the Hodge criteria.  

And make sure you check if Dan Hodge has rolled over in his grave.  If you don't want to exhume him, then consult Ben Askren for his thoughts or even Wade Schalles.  They will both chew the cauliflower ears off the wrestling community on this point about pinning.   

 

 

Steveson really is not an exception anymore. Of the last 10 Hodge winners, half did not lead in pinfalls among the finalists.

I chose 2012 as the starting point because that appears to be when the voting method changed. It went from a handful of people as part of a committee to a committee plus the vote of past Hodge winners. Ultimately, a fan vote was added to.

Edited February 21 by Wrestleknownothing

[Le duke]

Thoughts:

Fewer matches and fewer bums.

Guys aren’t seeing 40 matches, half of which are against backups, anymore. And the level has jumped considerably.

Watch the technical ability of guys winning titles in the 80s and 90s. Their defense was not great; far ankle scrambles basically didn’t exist. Some of those guys would get crushed by current top wrestlers.

I know I’ll get flamed for this but I don’t care:

Ed Banach vs Mark Schultz. That was an NCAA final in 1982. These guys would get stomped by recent 184s like Amine, Hidlay, Keckeisen or Brooks.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Wrestleknownothing]

40 minutes ago, ionel said:

What!?  

I was hacked

[Wrestleknownothing]

15 minutes ago, SocraTease said:

It's my general sense that pins are likely down in number over the past few years.  That is, that they are likely less common occurrences at the NCAA level as a whole.

So, I'm wondering:

1. Is that in fact the case?   What do the statistics actually say over a 3 year period? 5 year period.  10 or 20 year period?

2.  If it is the case, what are the likely or possible reasons (causes)?  More scrambling?  More defensive wrestling?  More emphasis on majors and tech falls?  A change in levels of competition?  Less emphasis by coaches? Something else?

3.  If pins are (or should be) valued as the way to score the most points for a team and as the best and most reliable way to end a match in victory for individuals, what can be done to change this situation or trend if in fact it exist?

To Wrestleknownothing (who seems to know quite a bit), do you have any data on this issue?  

the only stuff I have is at the tournament. nothing for the regular season. I will look later.

[SocraTease]

53 minutes ago, wrestle87 said:

You make some great points, but why tf did you put that in your post.  I legit thought it was an add for cauliflower drainage for a second. That’s gnarly.

I probably put it in to grab some attention.   You know . . . the way that Jonathan Swift immodestly included recipes for eating children in his "A Modest Proposal" as a form of extended irony in order to gain some interest in the issues he was raising about poverty, homelessness, the great need for adoption (reduction of unwanted babies), and the like.  In his case at least, it worked.

Edited February 21 by SocraTease

[ionel]

28 minutes ago, Wrestleknownothing said:

I was hacked

At least the hacker knows what he/she is talking about. 

[jchapman]

3 hours ago, SocraTease said:

I'm curious why Wyatt Hendrickson isn't being talked about and isn't even included in some of the Hodge rankings (e.g., FLO).  

 

Here are the Hodge criteria from the NCAA wrestling website:

 

Originally created to celebrate the pin in college wrestling, the Dan Hodge Trophy is based on seven criteria including record, number of pins, dominance, past credentials, quality of competition, sportsmanship/citizenship and heart. The trophy is based primarily on the results of a single season, but past accomplishments are considered as well, particularly in years where the competition is tighter. 

 

Hendrickson is 19-0.  

 

He has an 89% bonus rate. 

 

He leads the NCAA Division I in pins again this year. It's something like 15 and counting.  He's also won the Schalles Award for most pins the last two years, and he will likely win it again.  None of the other Hodge candidates are even close to those number of pins. He was the most dominant wrestler statistically the last two years and will probably be so this year.

 

He won the U23 Worlds at 125K in fall 2023. Last season, he was 31-2 and only lost to the NCAA champ and runner up.  The prior seasons he was 26-2.

 

Yes, he was hammered by Kerkviliet at the All Star match (while likely injured), but I don't believe that counts for Hodge.  

 

On sheer statistical evidence, a case could even be made that he should be ranked first.

 

And, no I don't expect him to win 285, but the guy's numbers are impressive.  If somehow he would win out he has to be in the Hodge conversation.

A multi-loss D3 guy won the Hodge.  So I guess Hendrickson has a chance…

[Wrestleknownothing]

13 minutes ago, jchapman said:

A multi-loss D3 guy won the Hodge.  So I guess Hendrickson has a chance…

Neither his division nor his losses were the most interesting thing about him.

[SocraTease]

3 hours ago, jchapman said:

A multi-loss D3 guy won the Hodge.  So I guess Hendrickson has a chance…

And who are we speaking about here?  Please name names

[SocraTease]

There are lots of problems with the Hodge voting.

A guy can take an early or unusual loss and, yes, actually still be the best NCAA wrestler.  Guys get caught or have a bad day or are sick or injured.  That should be considered.  If, for example, Brooks took an early loss in the season but came back to dominate should he be excluded from consideration? I say "no".

The Hodge voting, like most of America, has this terrible tendency toward "purity" -- no losses with close wins and a weak division or schedule is construed as better than complete dominance over an entire season against great opponents ... with the possible exception of, say, one loss against a good opponent (or even moving up a weight for the team).

The Hodge voting committee should clarify whether All Star matches count or not.   A decision might affect ome of the best wrestlers who might elect not to wrestle those matches if they aren't ready or fear a loss.   It can encourage avoidance.  And is bad for the sport.

The current Hodge procedures seem to discourage guys and teams from moving up a weight during a dual to win.  That used to be an exciting element of wrestling.  

The long and short: take into consideration the important variables.  Yes, criteria for the Hodge matter greatly, but make them (a) as clear as possible (prioritize the order or make them weighted as a percentage) and (b) make them reflect the reality of the sport  "on the ground" so as to encourage competition rather than reflect narrow statistical goals or largely subjective, popular, fan-based voting. 

Edited February 21 by SocraTease

[Wrestleknownothing]

5 hours ago, SocraTease said:

And who are we speaking about here?  Please name names

https://www.win-magazine.com/win-awards/hodge-trophy/nick-ackerman-2001-hodge-trophy-winner/

[Wrestleknownothing]

5 hours ago, SocraTease said:

There are lots of problems with the Hodge voting.

A guy can take an early or unusual loss and, yes, actually still be the best NCAA wrestler.  Guys get caught or have a bad day or are sick or injured.  That should be considered.  If, for example, Brooks took an early loss in the season but came back to dominate should he be excluded from consideration? I say "no".

The Hodge voting, like most of America, has this terrible tendency toward "purity" -- no losses with close wins and a weak division or schedule is construed as better than complete dominance over an entire season against great opponents ... with the possible exception of, say, one loss against a good opponent (or even moving up a weight for the team).

The Hodge voting committee should clarify whether All Star matches count or not.   A decision might affect ome of the best wrestlers who might elect not to wrestle those matches if they aren't ready or fear a loss.   It can encourage avoidance.  And is bad for the sport.

The current Hodge procedures seem to discourage guys and teams from moving up a weight during a dual to win.  That used to be an exciting element of wrestling.  

The long and short: take into consideration the important variables.  Yes, criteria for the Hodge matter greatly, but make them (a) as clear as possible (prioritize the order or make them weighted as a percentage) and (b) make them reflect the reality of the sport  "on the ground" so as to encourage competition rather than reflect narrow statistical goals or largely subjective, popular, fan-based voting. 

You contradict yourself so many times here, it is hard to respond.

For example, how do you "make them weighted as a percentage" and not "reflect narrow statistical goals"?

[Jim L]

8 hours ago, jchapman said:

A multi-loss D3 guy won the Hodge.  So I guess Hendrickson has a chance…

He also shared the award with Cael. Obviously he was a special interest story andthere is only award of national prominence for wrestling,  IMO it was a good thing for the sport to give him the award and give wrestling some positive publicity. One of the things almost everyone who loves the sport will say is htat anyone can do the sport and become good with hard work, it doesn't matter what your body type is.

 

[forkemaz]

10 hours ago, SocraTease said:

It's my general sense that pins are likely down in number over the past few years.  That is, that they are likely less common occurrences at the NCAA level as a whole.

So, I'm wondering:

1. Is that in fact the case?   What do the statistics actually say over a 3 year period? 5 year period.  10 or 20 year period?

2.  If it is the case, what are the likely or possible reasons (causes)?  More scrambling?  More defensive wrestling?  More emphasis on majors and tech falls?  A change in levels of competition?  Less emphasis by coaches? Something else?

3.  If pins are (or should be) valued as the way to score the most points for a team and as the best and most reliable way to end a match in victory for individuals, what can be done to change this situation or trend if in fact it exist?

To Wrestleknownothing (who seems to know quite a bit), do you have any data on this issue?  

To give my opinion on question three my answer is to emphasize the turn. We just did it with the take down moved it to 3 points. The turn is the most important scoring incentive because the pin should be the ultimate goal. I say make nearfall 2-5 points 1 point per swipe. We will have to move tech and major Criteria around but you get bigger scores and highly emphasize turning the bottom wrestler. Especially If you are behind and get a takedown. I have sent this idea to Christian Pyle personally several times and he never talks about it. He just takes my verbiage and steals if for his garbage opinions.