Will Ethen Miller sit tonight against Blaze?

[PortaJohn]

38 minutes ago, okokzach said:

Miller is ahead of Kasak because he has the win in their head-to-head and he's undefeated. You don't have to think he's better (ranking), but you do have to acknowledge it as a win (seeding).

If you want to penalize people for not wrestling scheduled events, I'm fine with that. But you have to do it for everyone regardless of their stated reason for missing. 

 

13 minutes ago, 1032004 said:

The B10 has no defined seeding criteria, so they don’t “have to” do anything

Just a hunch, but pretty sure Brands & Cael will work hard to keep Teemer and Kasak on the opposite side of the bracket.  I'm leaning Kasak 1, Miller 2, Teemer 3 or 6 or a combo of Kasak 2 Teemer 4 or 5

Edited Saturday at 03:24 PM by PortaJohn

[okokzach]

13 minutes ago, 1032004 said:

The B10 has no defined seeding criteria, so they don’t “have to” do anything

I didn't mention a they. I'm speaking to you, who wants to penalize someone for missing an event. If you care about being fair and consistent, then you have to apply that to everyone. Maybe I was being generous in assuming you want to be consistent and not just make arguments ad hoc that favor your guy. 

[1032004]

8 minutes ago, okokzach said:

I didn't mention a they. I'm speaking to you, who wants to penalize someone for missing an event. If you care about being fair and consistent, then you have to apply that to everyone. Maybe I was being generous in assuming you want to be consistent and not just make arguments ad hoc that favor your guy. 

Who did I say “not” to penalize for missing an event?  To be clear, I’m more saying an injury default should neither be penalized nor rewarded

[nhs67]

14 minutes ago, okokzach said:

I didn't mention a they. I'm speaking to you, who wants to penalize someone for missing an event. If you care about being fair and consistent, then you have to apply that to everyone. Maybe I was being generous in assuming you want to be consistent and not just make arguments ad hoc that favor your guy. 

I don't think 103 is rooting for any guy in particular, just giving 'the eye' test to it.

Also factoring in that there will be drama because backroom/unspoken deals do and have happened many times in seeding at conferences.

IMO Miller beat him prior  (this season) so he should not be penalized for sitting.

Kasak has a loss to Miller (it does count) and Teemer has a loss to Kasak.

[PortaJohn]

2 minutes ago, nhs67 said:

Also factoring in that there will be drama because backroom/unspoken deals do and have happened many times in seeding at conferences.

Always appreciate you bringing the raw truth to this board

[okokzach]

37 minutes ago, 1032004 said:

Who did I say “not” to penalize for missing an event?  To be clear, I’m more saying an injury default should neither be penalized nor rewarded

well if you're penalizing Miller for missing the Purdue dual, you'll also need to penalize Teemer and Kasak for the duals they missed. And now you're back where you started 

And ignoring matches where one guy quits in the middle for whatever reason is a bad path to go down imo 

Edited Saturday at 04:14 PM by okokzach

[scourge165]

30 minutes ago, okokzach said:

well if you're penalizing Miller for missing the Purdue dual, you'll also need to penalize Teemer and Kasak for the duals they missed. And now you're back where you started 

And ignoring matches where one guy quits in the middle for whatever reason is a bad path to go down imo 

I'm sorry, what now? Who was it that quit in the middle for..."whatever reason?"

[okokzach]

26 minutes ago, scourge165 said:

I'm sorry, what now? Who was it that quit in the middle for..."whatever reason?"

I think you're looking for a reason to be offended. I put it in broad terms to cover any reason a competitor might withdraw during a match. 

[scourge165]

3 minutes ago, okokzach said:

I think you're looking for a reason to be offended. I put it in broad terms to cover any reason a competitor might withdraw during a match. 

Yeah, no, it was the "quits" part I thought was kinda stupid.

I'm looking for a guy who has given up half way through the match. 

And just looking for clarification. 

[okokzach]

13 minutes ago, scourge165 said:

Yeah, no, it was the "quits" part I thought was kinda stupid.

I'm looking for a guy who has given up half way through the match. 

And just looking for clarification. 

quit, stop, cease, discontinue, resign, withdraw, desist. Let me know which word is least offensive to you

[1032004]

Just now, okokzach said:

well if you're penalizing Miller for missing the Purdue dual, you'll also need to penalize Teemer and Kasak for the duals they missed. And now you're back where you started 

Well I specifically said to penalize Teemer for missing the dual against Miller, so I am being consistent.

Keep in mind H2H is only one consideration, and again with no defined criteria there is nothing saying it needs to be the most important consideration.  Primarily it can be used when the 2 guys being compared have similar resumes (generally if they’re not comparable the better guy will have won the H2H except in the case of sitting out).  
 

If you look at the matches Teemer missed, other than Miller the only other guy with an argument over him when looking at the rest of their resumes is Taylor, and yes I probably would put Taylor above Teemer.   Last night was the first B10 dual Kasak missed, and the balance of Cannon’s resume (if he’s their starter) doesn’t give him an argument over Kasak IMO.  And I wouldn’t even necessarily give Blaze credit for a “win” against Miller, I’d just keep that in consideration when looking at the total resume. 

If I had a vote, here is how I’d vote for the top 4:

1. Kasak (undefeated except for the injury default, placed 3rd at 149 and beat Teemer this year who was last year’s finalist)

2. Miller (undefeated, Teemer didn’t show)

3. Taylor (only B10 loss is to Kasak, beat Askey, Teemer didn’t show)

4. Teemer (returning finalist, beat Askey)

So in reality this probably still works out for Miller with Kasak and Teemer on the same side.

5 & 6 is probably the biggest tossup to me. Blaze’s only loss to a B10 opponent is to Miller, and Askey’s only B10 losses are to Taylor and Teemer.  An interesting tidbit with these 2 is that Askey lost to Jared Hill of Wyoming, and Blaze MFF’d to Hill.  If Blaze had beat Hill that’d probably give him clear criteria over Askey IMO.

At first glance it seems the only dual remaining with major implications for this weight is Nebraska/Purdue but not sure if I missed any.

 

[1032004]

33 minutes ago, scourge165 said:

Yeah, no, it was the "quits" part I thought was kinda stupid.

I'm looking for a guy who has given up half way through the match. 

And just looking for clarification. 

Austin DeSanto against RBY?

[1032004]

44 minutes ago, okokzach said:

quit, stop, cease, discontinue, resign, withdraw, desist. Let me know which word is least offensive to you

Rankers have generally always ignored injury defaults. l know seeds aren’t rankings but again, with no defined criteria here there is nothing stopping the coaches from using that same reasoning.

[BruceyB]

32 minutes ago, 1032004 said:

If I had a vote, here is how I’d vote for the top 4:

1. Kasak (undefeated except for the injury default, placed 3rd at 149 and beat Teemer this year who was last year’s finalist)

2. Miller (undefeated, Teemer didn’t show)

3. Taylor (only B10 loss is to Kasak, beat Askey, Teemer didn’t show)

4. Teemer (returning finalist, beat Askey)

I think if you're PSU or Iowa, you give the #1 to Miller, #2 to Kasak, #3 Taylor, and #4 to Teemer. As @PortaJohn mentioned above. PSU and Iowa aren't arguing to have Kasak number 1 if Teemer is 4.

[scourge165]

46 minutes ago, 1032004 said:

Austin DeSanto against RBY?

Eh...Brands certainly seemed to think so. That's the one where DeSanto yelled out twice on his way to his back?

Sure, that'd be quitting. 

[1032004]

Willie says on podcast with Basch that he wouldn’t rule out coaches penalizing Miller for sitting and making Kasak the 1.