NCAA #1 seeds

[flyingcement]

Just now, Jimmy Cinnabon said:

Feels odd to put a guy at #1 after he was majored by the big ten champion. 

but if you can't put the big ten champion because he was pinned by a guy who barely qualified, then who do you put?  

[Jimmy Cinnabon]

Just now, Elevator said:

Kasak v Shapiro - hope it happens

Both studs with concussion issues

[flyingcement]

Just now, Elevator said:

Kasak v Shapiro - hope it happens

seems likely to be the finals

[MLB9]

5 minutes ago, Jimmy Cinnabon said:

Kasak probably has better wins though and won a much tougher conference. 

Yes sir, probably be him and Shapiro #2. We’ll know the 174 #1 shortly here too

[PortaJohn]

42 minutes ago, KCMO2 said:

O'Toole and Hamiti are going later tonight.  Winner should get 1 seed at 174.

That's pretty much a done deal

[lu_alum]

1 hour ago, MLB9 said:

Lilledahl or Ramos at 125, 141 will be very interesting. I’d guess Bartlett or Alirez, Hardy has one too many L’s.

What about Shapiro at 157?

Lilledahl will be higher than Ramos.  I can't see Bartlett as a #1 with a 3rd place finish in the conference tourney.  Remember, the seeding process follows the same guidelines (criteria/formula) as the allocation process.

 

Edited 20 hours ago by lu_alum

[Eagle26]

1 hour ago, JimmyCinnabon said:

Hardy has three losses though. Including to a guy he’s fighting for the number one seed. You can eliminate Mendez who now has three losses all to BB and Hardy. Andrew Alirez is a former national champ with one loss. 
 

In the end I am not sure what they will do.

They usually weigh conference championships heavier. Has someone ever been a number one seed who hasn’t won their conference? (legit question - I have no idea). I’d guess it goes to Hardy. 

[lu_alum]

8 minutes ago, Eagle26 said:

They usually weigh conference championships heavier. Has someone ever been a number one seed who hasn’t won their conference? (legit question - I have no idea). I’d guess it goes to Hardy. 

Conference placement is 10% of the formula.

[lu_alum]

1 hour ago, JimmyCinnabon said:

Hardy has three losses though. Including to a guy he’s fighting for the number one seed. You can eliminate Mendez who now has three losses all to BB and Hardy. Andrew Alirez is a former national champ with one loss. 
 

In the end I am not sure what they will do.

Alirez' previous title has no effect on the seeding process.  Everything is based solely on the 2024-25 season.

[Eagle26]

5 minutes ago, lu_alum said:

Conference placement is 10% of the formula.

Is it the first 10% or the last?

Maybe I’m wrong but I feel like they rarely give someone a number 1 seed if they don’t win their conference (rightfully so IMO)

[MLB9]

17 minutes ago, lu_alum said:

Lilledahl will be higher than Ramos.  I can't see Bartlett as a #1 with a 3rd place finish in the conference tourney.  Remember, the seeding process follows the same guidelines (criteria/formula) as the allocation process.

 

Who do you expect the formula to kick out?

[nhs67]

1 minute ago, MLB9 said:

Who do you expect the formula to kick out?

He is already up 50-10 w/ H2H, conference, and Coaches Rank (I don't see how he doesn't rank higher...).

[lu_alum]

3 minutes ago, nhs67 said:

He is already up 50-10 w/ H2H, conference, and Coaches Rank (I don't see how he doesn't rank higher...).

Who is he - there was discussion regarding two different weight classes in my post.  Coaches' Rank, RPI, and Win/Loss are re-calculated after the conference tourneys.  Assuming you are referring to Bartlett.. you have to assume he will drop in the Coaches' Rank.  Assuming they move up in both the Coaches' and RPI rankings (and Bartlett drops), Happel and Hardy can make strong cases for the #1 seed over Bartlett.

Pre-Conf Tourney Coaches' Rank:

Pre-Conf Tourney RPI:

[lu_alum]

1 hour ago, nhs67 said:

No.

Both him and Kasak have a MFF loss.

Injury Default losses, not MFF.  INJ DEF occurs during a match.  In the case of a MFF, no match took place.

[MLB9]

I was refering to Bartlett, but both those weights(125/141) will be intriguing. Thank you guys

[cowcards]

#1 - Ramos
#2 - Lilledahl
#3 - Ventresca
#4 - Figueroa 

#1 - Byrd
#2 - Ayala
#3 - Bailey
#4 - Romney

#1 - Bartlett
#2 - Mendez
#3 - Hardy
#4 - Koderhandt

#1 - Henson
#2 - Lovett
#3 - Van Ness
#4 - Parco

#1 - Kasak
#2 - Shapiro
#3 - Taylor
#4 - Blaze

#1 - Messenbrink
#2 - Caliendo
#3 - Hall
#4 - Ramirez

#1 - O'Toole
#2 - Hamiti
#3 - Haines
#4 - Kharchala

#1 - Keckeisen
#2 - Starocci
#3 - McEnelly
#4 - Plott

#1 - Cardenas
#2 - Buchanan
#3 - Ferrari 
#4 - Beard

#1 - Steveson
#2 - Hendrickson
#3 - Trephan
#4 - Kerkvliet

[SocraTease]

28 minutes ago, cowcards said:

#1 - Ramos
#2 - Lilledahl
#3 - Ventresca
#4 - Figueroa 

#1 - Byrd
#2 - Ayala
#3 - Bailey
#4 - Romney

#1 - Bartlett
#2 - Mendez
#3 - Hardy
#4 - Koderhandt

#1 - Henson
#2 - Lovett
#3 - Van Ness
#4 - Parco

#1 - Kasak
#2 - Shapiro
#3 - Taylor
#4 - Blaze

#1 - Messenbrink
#2 - Caliendo
#3 - Hall
#4 - Ramirez

#1 - O'Toole
#2 - Hamiti
#3 - Haines
#4 - Kharchala

#1 - Keckeisen
#2 - Starocci
#3 - McEnelly
#4 - Plott

#1 - Cardenas
#2 - Buchanan
#3 - Ferrari 
#4 - Beard

#1 - Steveson
#2 - Hendrickson
#3 - Trephan
#4 - Kerkvliet

I can't see any scenario where Keckheisen gets #1 over Starocci.

What kind of schedule did Trephen have?  Can't imagine his wins are as good as Kerkviliet.

I also don't like Ramos over Llilledahl, especially since LL just majored him.  Fresh in folks minds.

Kharchala at #4 is weak.  But there is a big drop off after the first 3

[Wrestleknownothing]

39 minutes ago, cowcards said:

#1 - Ramos
#2 - Lilledahl
#3 - Ventresca
#4 - Figueroa 

#1 - Byrd
#2 - Ayala
#3 - Bailey
#4 - Romney

#1 - Bartlett
#2 - Mendez
#3 - Hardy
#4 - Koderhandt

#1 - Henson
#2 - Lovett
#3 - Van Ness
#4 - Parco

#1 - Kasak
#2 - Shapiro
#3 - Taylor
#4 - Blaze

#1 - Messenbrink
#2 - Caliendo
#3 - Hall
#4 - Ramirez

#1 - O'Toole
#2 - Hamiti
#3 - Haines
#4 - Kharchala

#1 - Keckeisen
#2 - Starocci
#3 - McEnelly
#4 - Plott

#1 - Cardenas
#2 - Buchanan
#3 - Ferrari 
#4 - Beard

#1 - Steveson
#2 - Hendrickson
#3 - Trephan
#4 - Kerkvliet

Ramos v Lilledahl likely comes down to whoever has the higher coaches' rank (worth 15) as Lilledahl already has 35 points in the bank with the h2h win (25) and the higher conference placement (10).

Ramos has win % (10) and common opponents (10) locked up and a huge quality win advantage (either 20 or 15).

[JimmyCinnabon]

8 hours ago, lu_alum said:

Alirez' previous title has no effect on the seeding process.  Everything is based solely on the 2024-25 season.

Everyone always says this but humans will human. 

[nhs67]

9 hours ago, lu_alum said:

Who is he - there was discussion regarding two different weight classes in my post.  Coaches' Rank, RPI, and Win/Loss are re-calculated after the conference tourneys.  Assuming you are referring to Bartlett.. you have to assume he will drop in the Coaches' Rank.  Assuming they move up in both the Coaches' and RPI rankings (and Bartlett drops), Happel and Hardy can make strong cases for the #1 seed over Bartlett.

Pre-Conf Tourney Coaches' Rank:

Pre-Conf Tourney RPI:

Sorry, I meant Lightning Luke was up.

[cowcards]

8 hours ago, SocraTease said:

I can't see any scenario where Keckheisen gets #1 over Starocci.

What kind of schedule did Trephen have?  Can't imagine his wins are as good as Kerkviliet.

I also don't like Ramos over Llilledahl, especially since LL just majored him.  Fresh in folks minds.

Kharchala at #4 is weak.  But there is a big drop off after the first 3

- Keckeisen had higher quality of wins (Plott x3, Berge x2 vs. Allred, McEnelly) . Everything else was equal.
- He had a win over Schultz, Luffman, and day x2. The Schultz win gets him here. 
- I get that everyone thinks that LL should be ahead of Ramos, but he does have losses to 2 guys that won't be top-12 seeds. Ramos has one loss to LL. 
- Kharchala was a product of elimination of everyone else. Anyone else in contention lost this weekend and had worse losses than Braunagel. 

8 hours ago, Wrestleknownothing said:

Ramos v Lilledahl likely comes down to whoever has the higher coaches' rank (worth 15) as Lilledahl already has 35 points in the bank with the h2h win (25) and the higher conference placement (10).

Ramos has win % (10) and common opponents (10) locked up and a huge quality win advantage (either 20 or 15).

Is that the sheet they actually use to seed? Even so, I think Ramos comes out ahead of everything else. 

[Crotalus]

- Keckeisen had higher quality of wins (Plott x3, Berge x2 vs. Allred, McEnelly) . Everything else was equal.

There is certainly an argument for him at 1 as the returning undefeated champ at the weight with the better wins, but Carter is #1 in the coaches rankings and hard to imaging the coaches switching that despite a tight Big 10 finals match. And while the All-Star match shouldn't matter, we've seen in the past that it does.

Ramos v Lilledahl likely comes down to whoever has the higher coaches' rank (worth 15) as Lilledahl already has 35 points in the bank with the h2h win (25) and the higher conference placement (10).
Ramos has win % (10) and common opponents (10) locked up and a huge quality win advantage (either 20 or 15).

Gotta think the coaches will have Lilledahl higher after that dominant head to head performance, emphasizing a strong Big 10 tournament over a couple of hiccups mid season. It would be weird for there to not be any consequences from that loss for Ramos.

[Wrestleknownothing]

25 minutes ago, cowcards said:

 

Is that the sheet they actually use to seed? Even so, I think Ramos comes out ahead of everything else. 

Yes, and no.

They use that math to produce a set of seeds for the seeding committee. The committee can then move someone up or down as many as three spots.  I think Starocci was #7 last year by the numbers, but wound #9 after committee deliberations.

[cowcards]

6 minutes ago, Crotalus said:

There is certainly an argument for him at 1 as the returning undefeated champ at the weight with the better wins, but Carter is #1 in the coaches rankings and hard to imaging the coaches switching that despite a tight Big 10 finals match. And while the All-Star match shouldn't matter, we've seen in the past that it does.



Gotta think the coaches will have Lilledahl higher after that dominant head to head performance, emphasizing a strong Big 10 tournament over a couple of hiccups mid season. It would be weird for there to not be any consequences from that loss for Ramos.

 

- Even if the coaches have Starocci higher, every other metric favors Keckeisen without a head-to-head to use. 

- Seeding is based on the full body of work too. I don't think the coaches will have Lilledahl ahead of Ramos based off one win. Luke was 8th in the last one with Ramos first. Ventresca was ranked ahead of Luke with another win over Robinson who was also ranked ahead of Luke and won his tournament. Won't jump him. You could make a case Robinson wouldn't be jumped either. He should end up 3rd. The consequences are that there is a debate to whether Ramos should be the 1 seed vs. a clear yes. Fortunately , for Ramos, he didn't quite lose the seed. 

Why is there not consequences for Lilledahl's weaker season body of work vs. 1 match of work? LL wouldn't have been in contention for a top-4 seed without the win. Now he is 2nd. That's a great consequence. 

6 minutes ago, Wrestleknownothing said:

Yes, and no.

They use that math to produce a set of seeds for the seeding committee. The committee can then move someone up or down as many as three spots.  I think Starocci was #7 last year by the numbers, but wound #9 after committee deliberations.

Got it. Thanks. 

[Wrestleknownothing]

1 minute ago, Crotalus said:

 

 

There is certainly an argument for him at 1 as the returning undefeated champ at the weight with the better wins, but Carter is #1 in the coaches rankings and hard to imaging the coaches switching that despite a tight Big 10 finals match. And while the All-Star match shouldn't matter, we've seen in the past that it does. Do the other criteria favor Parker enough?



Gotta think the coaches will have Lilledahl higher after that dominant head to head performance, emphasizing a strong Big 10 tournament over a couple of hiccups mid season. It would be weird for there to not be any consequences from that loss for Ramos.

 

Starocci v Keckeisen:

• 25 H2H is N/A.
• 20 Quality wins is going to be real close between Starocci and Keckeisen. It will come down to how their opponents are ranked in the final coaches' poll as they both have a lot of QW's. 
• 15 Tournament finish is a push
• 10 Coaches' rank probably favors Starocci
• 10 common opponents is a push
• 10 win percentage is a push
• 10 RPI favors Starocci

So I think Starocci wins the formula and I do not see the committee reversing that.