How to rank 2-4 at 149

[JVStateChamp]

1 minute ago, Jimmy Cinnabon said:

Say Lovett lost a 3rd time to a non-conference opponent.  Do you still seed him #1 for Big 10s if SVN and Parco only have 1 loss?

No I dont seed him #1, that being because whoever he lost to would have to be of a lower caliber than SVN and Parco. Henson is the returning NCAA champ which is why I do not believe that the loss should count as a negative towards him. I would feel the same way if SVN or Parco had 2 losses and the extra loss was Henson. This is the exact reason why some coaches choose to sit their wrestlers against tough opponents. We are rewarding the two wrestlers that didnt wrestle Henson which seems foolish

[1032004]

Intermat did the same order.  

[nhs67]

With how the matches were won, I don't know if I see the results switching at all.  Now, I don't think any of them are a lock to make the finals as the topside gent will potentially have Webster (who will have to avenge a loss to Cartella to make the semi-finals, I think).

That said, if SVN is seeded first, I see him beating Parco (who beats Lovett in the semi-finals).  If Lovett is seeded first, I see him beating SVN in the finals (who beats Parco in the semi-finals).  Lastly, if Parco is seeded first, I have him beating Lovett in the finals (who beats SVN in the semi-finals).  The matches had clear winners, all of them (even if Parco-Lovett was 'RCH' close, it has been that close three times now with the same victor each time).

[Gene Mills Fan]

I'm thinking SVN gets the B1G one seed because he has the major and has the oldest loss.

[VakAttack]

15 minutes ago, Gene Mills Fan said:

I'm thinking SVN gets the B1G one seed because he has the major and has the oldest loss.

This is silly logic. So of course they'll use it

[nhs67]

1 minute ago, VakAttack said:

This is silly logic. So of course they'll use it

Oldest loss isn't silly, but the Major is, because Lovett also has a Major victory (over SVN ).

[VakAttack]

5 minutes ago, nhs67 said:

Oldest loss isn't silly, but the Major is, because Lovett also has a Major victory (over SVN ).

If one loss was in November vs. Januaru...sure.  The SVN-Lovett match was separated from the SVN-Parco match by one match.

[nhs67]

11 minutes ago, VakAttack said:

If one loss was in November vs. Januaru...sure.  The SVN-Lovett match was separated from the SVN-Parco match by one match.

Either way, it isn't a silly criteria.

Most rankers penalize the most recent loser, which means the one who lost first will be penalized the least by the time the last loss comes.

When it comes to seeding purposes for the NCAA tournament, Coaches Rank does matter, and if that is the logic of the folks doing the rankings, then it is isn't a silly criteria.

I do agree that saying SVN because he has the most recent Major is silly.  By that logic, Lovett should be ranked higher, because he won by Major and lost via regular Decision, whereas SVN won and lost by Major and Parco won via regular Decision and lost via Major.

[Gus]

5 minutes ago, nhs67 said:

Either way, it isn't a silly criteria.

Most rankers penalize the most recent loser, which means the one who lost first will be penalized the least by the time the last loss comes.

When it comes to seeding purposes for the NCAA tournament, Coaches Rank does matter, and if that is the logic of the folks doing the rankings, then it is isn't a silly criteria.

I do agree that saying SVN because he has the most recent Major is silly.  By that logic, Lovett should be ranked higher, because he won by Major and lost via regular Decision, whereas SVN won and lost by Major and Parco won via regular Decision and lost via Major.

I am having a hard time finding a scenario where Parco gets the top seed unless SVN drops a match. SVN's remaining schedule is D'Emilio (tOSU, Webster (Illinois) and Owen (American). Parco has Roberts (Minnesota), Cartella (NW) and Young (OSU). Lovett has Torres (Indiana) and Ruble (Purdue). Hard to see any of these guys dropping a match. 

[VakAttack]

1 hour ago, nhs67 said:

Either way, it isn't a silly criteria.

Most rankers penalize the most recent loser, which means the one who lost first will be penalized the least by the time the last loss comes.

When it comes to seeding purposes for the NCAA tournament, Coaches Rank does matter, and if that is the logic of the folks doing the rankings, then it is isn't a silly criteria.

I do agree that saying SVN because he has the most recent Major is silly.  By that logic, Lovett should be ranked higher, because he won by Major and lost via regular Decision, whereas SVN won and lost by Major and Parco won via regular Decision and lost via Major.

It can be a silly criteria and also have a dramatic affect on something.  For example, the Hodge Trophy used to have a criteria of "Heart" and "Citizenship."  Those are obviously silly criteria to use to determine either the best or most dominant college wrestler, but there they were.

1 hour ago, Gus said:

I am having a hard time finding a scenario where Parco gets the top seed unless SVN drops a match. SVN's remaining schedule is D'Emilio (tOSU, Webster (Illinois) and Owen (American). Parco has Roberts (Minnesota), Cartella (NW) and Young (OSU). Lovett has Torres (Indiana) and Ruble (Purdue). Hard to see any of these guys dropping a match. 

The argument is pretty simple:  Their wins against each other cancel each other out, and Parco has a slightly better resume in terms of wins than Lovett (and one less loss).  I'm not saying I subscribe to that opinion necessarily, but the argument is pretty simple.

[1032004]

3 hours ago, nhs67 said:

Either way, it isn't a silly criteria.

Most rankers penalize the most recent loser, which means the one who lost first will be penalized the least by the time the last loss comes.

When it comes to seeding purposes for the NCAA tournament, Coaches Rank does matter, and if that is the logic of the folks doing the rankings, then it is isn't a silly criteria.

I don’t think NCAA seeding is really relevant to this particular discussion.  They’ll be seeded in the order they finish at B10’s (just not sure if anyone else could slip in between them).  But of course where they’re seeded for B10’s will impact who matches up with who.
 

3 hours ago, Gus said:

I am having a hard time finding a scenario where Parco gets the top seed unless SVN drops a match. SVN's remaining schedule is D'Emilio (tOSU, Webster (Illinois) and Owen (American). Parco has Roberts (Minnesota), Cartella (NW) and Young (OSU). Lovett has Torres (Indiana) and Ruble (Purdue). Hard to see any of these guys dropping a match. 

Yeah, my earlier argument was that currently SVN had the weakest resume of wins.  But he has two of the tougher guys upcoming.  I don’t think he’ll lose, but it will help his overall resume.

[BruceyB]

Can someone explain to me why SVN has been the benefactor of Parco's win over Lovett? In the last 3 weeks..

Week 1: #4 Lovett beats #2 SVN = #2 Lovett, #3 SVN, #4 Parco

Week 2: #3 SVN beats #4 Parco = no change

Week 3: #4 Parco beats #2 Lovett = #2 SVN, #3 Parco, #4 Lovett

I don't understand why Parco cannot jump to #2 despite losing to #3 SVN, but SVN can move above Lovett based on Parco's win? If each has a loss and win over another, why wouldn't the wrestler that has the most recent win over the (at the time) #2 wrestler move to the top?

[VakAttack]

29 minutes ago, 1032004 said:

I don’t think NCAA seeding is really relevant to this particular discussion.  They’ll be seeded in the order they finish at B10’s (just not sure if anyone else could slip in between them).  But of course where they’re seeded for B10’s will impact who matches up with who.
 

Yeah, my earlier argument was that currently SVN had the weakest resume of wins.  But he has two of the tougher guys upcoming.  I don’t think he’ll lose, but it will help his overall resume.

I think there's a distinct chance that the B1G guys have some of the other conference guys jump them (outside of Henson, obviously).  McNeil, Johnson, Lamer, Realbuto, Stiles all have good resumes.  If I had to guess, I'd say B1G winner gets the 2 seed, the B1G runner up the 4 seed, and the B1G 3rd placer like 6 or 7.

[Dogbone]

4 minutes ago, VakAttack said:

I think there's a distinct chance that the B1G guys have some of the other conference guys jump them (outside of Henson, obviously).  McNeil, Johnson, Lamer, Realbuto, Stiles all have good resumes.  If I had to guess, I'd say B1G winner gets the 2 seed, the B1G runner up the 4 seed, and the B1G 3rd placer like 6 or 7.

I can only see the B1G 3rd dropping to 5th (and the drop from 4th to 5th isn't that big a deal as the quarter matchup is the same).

McNeil has losses to Lovett and Parco so I can't see him jumping them.

Johnson does not have a great resume at 149 this year, which I think is all the committee factors.  Realbuto will probably be his best win and he may have to do it twice still.

Realbutto losses to Lovett and McNeil prevent him from jump up in there.

Maybe the Pac 12 champ can squeeze into the top 4 since they give conference champ weight but its tough to see multiple guys getting in front of the B1G 3rd. 

[Truzzcat]

36 minutes ago, BruceyB said:

Can someone explain to me why SVN has been the benefactor of Parco's win over Lovett? In the last 3 weeks..

Week 1: #4 Lovett beats #2 SVN = #2 Lovett, #3 SVN, #4 Parco

Week 2: #3 SVN beats #4 Parco = no change

Week 3: #4 Parco beats #2 Lovett = #2 SVN, #3 Parco, #4 Lovett

I don't understand why Parco cannot jump to #2 despite losing to #3 SVN, but SVN can move above Lovett based on Parco's win? If each has a loss and win over another, why wouldn't the wrestler that has the most recent win over the (at the time) #2 wrestler move to the top?

I understand the sentiment I think Lovett having 2 losses even though one is 2 henson just dings him the slightest bit to where he ends up 3. 

[VakAttack]

8 minutes ago, Truzzcat said:

I understand the sentiment I think Lovett having 2 losses even though one is 2 henson just dings him the slightest bit to where he ends up 3. 

At NCAAs, yes.  At the B1Gs, though...?

[Truzzcat]

2 minutes ago, VakAttack said:

At NCAAs, yes.  At the B1Gs, though...?

Its so hard to know what they account for. I am a firm believer conference rankings should be solely predicated on conference results. But then I see people arguing Kerk over Gable because he won it more recently even though they will have the same in conference record but kerk will have a 50% bonus rate vs Gables 100%. I also do not like bonus for ranking or seeding criteria but when you are looking at two guys with the same resume to me it would be the tiebreaker. So, looking at those 3 guys they all have beaten each other so the tiebreaker to me would be winning pct which removes Ridge and then it would be h2h which would put SVN at the 1. 

[BruceyB]

34 minutes ago, VakAttack said:

I think there's a distinct chance that the B1G guys have some of the other conference guys jump them (outside of Henson, obviously).  McNeil, Johnson, Lamer, Realbuto, Stiles all have good resumes.  If I had to guess, I'd say B1G winner gets the 2 seed, the B1G runner up the 4 seed, and the B1G 3rd placer like 6 or 7.

I hadn't thought about it, but I definitely think you're onto something. Lamer, Stiles, and Whalen each have 1 loss at the weight, and Paniro is undefeated. I wouldn't be surprised if it went something similar to:

1. Henson

2. B1G champ

3. Lamer/Stiles/Paniro/Whalen

4. B1G runner-up

5. Lamer/Stiles/Paniro/Whalen/McNeil

6. B1G 3rd

[Gus]

8 minutes ago, BruceyB said:

I hadn't thought about it, but I definitely think you're onto something. Lamer, Stiles, and Whalen each have 1 loss at the weight, and Paniro is undefeated. I wouldn't be surprised if it went something similar to:

1. Henson

2. B1G champ

3. Lamer/Stiles/Paniro/Whalen

4. B1G runner-up

5. Lamer/Stiles/Paniro/Whalen/McNeil

6. B1G 3rd

Losses matter though. Lamer lost to Stiles. Whalen lost to Alvarez. Stiles lost to Willochell. Paniro may get a high seed if he wins out but he is the only one I would see possibly jumping a B1G guy (unless one of the three B1G guys finishes 4th or lower at B1G's). I suspect it will go Henson, B1G 1st, B1G 2nd, Paniro if he wins out, B1G 3rd, McNeil... 

[VakAttack]

6 minutes ago, Gus said:

Losses matter though. Lamer lost to Stiles. Whalen lost to Alvarez. Stiles lost to Willochell. Paniro may get a high seed if he wins out but he is the only one I would see possibly jumping a B1G guy (unless one of the three B1G guys finishes 4th or lower at B1G's). I suspect it will go Henson, B1G 1st, B1G 2nd, Paniro if he wins out, B1G 3rd, McNeil... 

Actually, not directly.  I feel like this comes up every year.  The seeding matrix used at the NCAAs does not directly take into account the losses other than in win/loss percentage and RPI, and those are both overall low pieces of the ranking matrix.

Factors in the NCAA seeding matrix 

 

• Head-to-head competition: 25% of the total score
• Quality wins: 20% of the total score
• Coaches' rankings: 15% of the total score
• Results against common opponents: 10% of the total score
• RPI (Ratings Percentage Index): 10% of the total score
• Qualifying event placement: 10% of the total score
• Win %: 10% of the total score

[nhs67]

One thing folks need to realize/understand is that Johnson is undefeated.  Only his matches at 149lbs will count towards seeding, and he is currently 11W - 0L.

If he wins out, he could get the #3 seed, but I still anticipate the B1G runner-up to get the #3 seed (if it is one of the aforementioned gents).

I think the B1G 3rd placer (again, if he is one of the aforementioned gents) might end up as the #6 seed.  That would put all three on the same side.

[nhs67]

Also, if Johnson wins out, he will jump one, or both, of the 2nd/3rd placer at B1Gs simply because he won out.  Flo and Intermat might not jump folks for not beating other folks ahead of them, but Coaches will give it the eye test and a bump for it.

[BruceyB]

10 minutes ago, nhs67 said:

I think the B1G 3rd placer (again, if he is one of the aforementioned gents) might end up as the #6 seed.  That would put all three on the same side.

I think that is where the coaches ability to slightly shift a seed would probably come into play. I would be shocked if they allowed all of them to be on one side.

[Dogbone]

4 minutes ago, nhs67 said:

Also, if Johnson wins out, he will jump one, or both, of the 2nd/3rd placer at B1Gs simply because he won out.  Flo and Intermat might not jump folks for not beating other folks ahead of them, but Coaches will give it the eye test and a bump for it.

I get he is undefeated at 149 but he will still be behind the 3 B1Gs guys on quality wins, coaches ranking, and RPI.   The B1G runner up will probably get higher quality wins at the B1G tournament than he will get winning the B12 tourney.

He will have winning% and higher place at the conference, which might put him above the B1G 3rd place finisher. 

The B1G runner-up  could have to beat D'Emilo/Webster and one of the the other 3 to make the finals.   I don't see the eye test of beating Realbuto justify jumping the B1G runner-up.

 

[1032004]

1 hour ago, nhs67 said:

Also, if Johnson wins out, he will jump one, or both, of the 2nd/3rd placer at B1Gs simply because he won out.  Flo and Intermat might not jump folks for not beating other folks ahead of them, but Coaches will give it the eye test and a bump for it.

I doubt coaches rank will move him up.  But he could move up based on NCAA seeding criteria. 

I kinda think he’s the only guy that splits the 3 B10 guys, but who knows.