Leaderboard

Since seeding is such a big topic around here the last couple days, figured I would give you guys this chart that shows the count of how many times a seed has finished in each place (or not placed) for D1. *Note-This isn't perfect as there are years where I don't have all the seeds. Left column is the seed (blue) and top column is the place (orange). NS=No Seed & DNP = Did Not Place Seed/Place 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 DNP 1 406 143 97 39 25 10 10 1 63 2 164 236 99 76 40 20 9 6 135 3 72 137 139 105 60 49 26 7 191 4 49 65 122 110 69 61 27 15 255 5 21 33 79 73 70 58 43 14 291 6 24 43 57 54 62 61 32 21 332 7 3 25 22 34 54 45 45 35 301 8 11 12 16 27 41 34 56 35 330 9 3 6 15 18 26 26 36 38 318 10 1 7 6 25 21 31 29 28 335 11 1 4 6 13 18 22 20 43 329 12 1 1 6 9 8 16 18 37 355 13 1 2 1 2 3 6 131 14 1 1 2 5 1 4 131 15 2 1 1 2 5 6 3 125 16 1 1 4 131 17 2 2 1 56 18 1 59 19 1 59 20 1 59 21 1 1 58 22 60 23 1 59 24 60 25 1 1 58 26 1 1 2 56 27 1 59 28 1 59 29 60 30 60 31 60 32 60 33 1 57 NS 132 174 221 207 115 164 84 142 14225

Insults question as too childish to take seriously--then thinks deeply about answer and summarizes all long-stored up thoughts on the subject.

When they kick Brennan out of the tournament, he should show up nWo style from the crowd to wrestle Thompson.

Glad to contribute. Real thanks goes to @SNL Wrestling...he got them out quick!

Lehigh's Rob Rohn was trailing 14-2 late in the third period and mixered OK's Josh Lambrecht for the fall in 2002. 4 pins in a row in the NCAA championships.

Kasak doesn’t appear to have ever missed a leg day weight training since about 12 years old

Post as they Go 125

Zach Glazier is going to have 21,000 people rooting for him to do the funniest thing Thursday night

Only four teams got the full slate in

Stout v Stout in 2nd round - ouch Like the top 5 seeds!

141

133

Some context is needed here. Cannon, talent wise, in every way shape in form is a blue chip recruit. He won Beast of the East as a Freshman at Wyoming Sem. Then he unfortunately got cancer. When he finally came back from that he went to Ironman and knocked off Nasir Bailey. I think he lost in the finals. I remember hearing or reading that when he came back he wrestled with pads to protect his body. Maybe it was just in practice. So yes, talent wise he's a high level recruit but after battling cancer there were of course question marks on his health.

Meat is murder. Tasty, tasty murder.

Not forgetting them. I just did not go that low.

Always forgetting Cornell. Year after year. And year after year, they are right up there!

Two-time finalist and 2023 National Champ from Glenville State, Gavin Quiocho, wasn't in the line-up this past weekend. His coach, former WVU NQ Dylan Cottrell, claimed that he struggled to make 133 AND that he lost wrestle-offs to the 141 who took sixth at Super Region III. UW-Parkside took it on the chin from 133 to 157. Then again, that SR might be the toughest in D2, if not the second toughest. Coach Becker has to be feeling the results this morning. New Jersey's brand new program, Felician, qualified two to the tournament. Congrats! American International had their final qualifier this year at 157. Sad to see the program fold. University of Nebraska-Kearney had a GREAT second half of the season and look mighty strong heading into Nationals. Can three-time finalist and 2024 National Champ at 197, Derek Blubaugh from University of Indianapolis, make a fourth finals? First, it was Abney from Central Oklahoma who had his number, and now it may be Logan Kvien of McKendree. Either way, Blubaugh is a monster and a great kid to boot. Congratulations to the 50 teams that qualified at least one guy to the tournament in two weekends! With six-plus teams coming to D2 in the next few seasons, the NCAA might want to look at the structure of the Super Regions. You now have three really strong ones and three SRs which aren't as competitive. The coaches want the BEST kids at the tournament, just like in D1, and not just regional representation.

Heavy

184

174

165

Lilledahl and Hardy get “rewarded” by both having national champs on their side of the bracket

149

Most people don't realize how tough it is to wrestle without a soul. Only Caliendo understands.

He has red hair, hasn't he been through enough? Let him wrestle.

The personality assessment was positive! Another positive sign is that your ratio of reputation to posts is 81%. I do laugh every time you post. My customized version of the Intermat replaces default profile images based on the username. Something tells me this image is not what you intended!

Nope - there is no spirt or intent for a weigh in rule for conference championships. It's in writing - it's been that way for a long time. You are in favor of giving some guys extra time to make weight but not others? It's weigh in - it's a big part of wrestling and it is important. The babies are actually the ones who can't meet the expectations and need the rules changed just for them.

May have something to do with Lorenzo Norman or maybe Tyler Brennan, he of the 5 postseasons.

He was a a pinner in that event but not really overall. He had his share (~17 over his 4 years and only 2 that season). Also, as far as I can recall, none by cement job. When I saw him cooling down after the semis, I told him he didn't have a cement job. He laughed and agreed. He said he hadn't really hit any successfully in the past.

Then the refs are applying the rule flawlessly.

First time here?

Mesenbrink coming in over Facundo who was a top #3 recruit with 3 years of eligibility remaining. Dean coming in over Beard who was a returning AA with 3 years of eligibility remaining. Then recently their abundance of wrestlers who will be overlapping in eligibility and weights. @VakAttack you know I have my fair share of criticism towards Iowa, but I also find the hypocrisy of always casting Iowa as the villains amusing. Nearly every school is going to bring in a high level transfer if they have the means and a spot that is questionable in their line-up. Wrestlers, just like coaches, should be aware that in today's college landscape, no athlete is guaranteed to stay at your program for their entire career, and likewise the athletes should know that if they aren't getting the job done, these top programs will go out and find someone that will. The difference between PSU and everyone else is that they have turned high level recruits into national champions at a rate that hasn't been even remotely comparable by any other team in the past 15 years. What about Facundo's parents who watched PSU bring in a four-year-wonder from the portal that wipes out their son's ability to get in the line-up at his optimal weight for the rest of his career? The Mirasola's who may or may not make the starting line-up next year, especially if Ghadiali transfers in. Joe Sealey who committed and then Mesenbrink comes in, and PSU recruits PJ Duke?

I think it's more fun to have favorite wrestlers rather than favorite teams. They're not totally mutually exclusive, but they don't have to 100% overlap either.

Saylors Tiny Willie is a provocative, extroverted individual with moderate intelligence and a combative streak. They thrive on conflict, showing low agreeableness and high risk tolerance, with a sarcastic, negative tone dominating their output. Reasoning blends data and emotion, but leans toward emotional venting. They’re not a leader or empath, instead motivated by winning arguments and asserting dominance, with a fairness-based moral lens skewed by disdain for opponents. Likely an American with a sharp, urban wit, they lash out under stress and exhibit avoidant attachment, fitting a trollish, ESTJ-like archetype. Are they a troll? (Provocative, insincere, disruptive?) Yes, strong troll tendencies. Comments like "Cry harder," "Say it with me, 'Trump is a pedophile,'" and "You continue to be the dumbest poster here" are provocative and designed to inflame rather than inform. The repeated demands to "SHOW YOUR WORK" on the Columbia Student Arrested thread suggest a performative challenge rather than genuine inquiry, a classic troll tactic to disrupt and derail. What’s their estimated IQ? (Rough guess based on reasoning, vocabulary, nuance?) Moderate to above-average (110-130). Vocabulary is sharp ("narcissistic wound," "sundowning," "dopamine maximization"), and some posts show reasoning (e.g., linking cigarette engineering to social media addiction with sources). However, the reliance on insults over sustained argument limits nuance, capping the upper end of this estimate. Do they fit the Dark Triad? Narcissism: Moderate. Attention-seeking is evident in bold provocations ("Mark this post"), but no overt bragging. Machiavellianism: Low to moderate. Some strategic jabs (e.g., "I merely lift the mirror for your convenience") suggest manipulation, but it’s not highly calculated. Psychopathy: Moderate. Callousness shines through in harsh insults ("dumbest poster," "dingbat") and conflict-loving tone ("Get that popcorn ready"), but no extreme cruelty. Are they positive or negative? (Uplifting vs. critical tone?) Overwhelmingly negative. Nearly all comments criticize, mock, or attack others’ views, with no uplifting or constructive remarks. Even neutral topics (e.g., wrestling) get a cynical spin ("Ferrari never wins another medal"). Do they reason based on data or emotion? (Facts/logic vs. feelings?) Mixed, leaning emotional. Some posts cite data (e.g., links to FDA, Truth Initiative, or Trump turnover stats), but the dominant mode is emotional—anger, scorn, and sarcasm drive most responses ("Trump’s going to ban vaccines… How much dumber can it get?!"). Big Five Assessment Openness: Moderate. Shows curiosity in citing sources and exploring topics (e.g., tech addiction), but sticks to a narrow, combative style. Conscientiousness: Low. Posts are rushed, sloppy (e.g., "on faire" typo), and lack follow-through on arguments. Extraversion: High. Energetic, engaged, and eager to clash in a public forum. Agreeableness: Very low. Harsh, argumentative, and uncooperative ("You’re clearly a dingbat"). Neuroticism: Moderate. Moody and reactive, but not overly anxious—more aggressive than unstable. What Myers-Brigg Type Indicator personality type best fits them? Introversion (I) vs. Extraversion (E): Extraversion (E). Highly engaged, frequent posting, and bold confrontation ("I’ll make your head into a canoe") point to an outgoing, energetic style, not a reserved or low-profile one. Sensing (S) vs. Intuition (N): Sensing (S). Focuses on concrete details—like specific laws ("Cite the statute violated"), events, or stats (Trump turnover)—over abstract theorizing. Rarely explores big-picture ideas beyond immediate jabs. Thinking (T) vs. Feeling (F): Thinking (T). Prioritizes logic and fairness ("Which law did he break?") over empathy or emotion-driven decisions, despite emotional tone. No signs of compassion or people-pleasing. Judging (J) vs. Perceiving (P): Judging (J). Decisive, structured in arguments ("Take it to the bank"), and quick to conclude others’ failings ("You’re clearly a dingbat"), rather than leaving things open-ended or flexible. Likely Type: ESTJ (The Executive). This fits their assertive, detail-focused, logic-driven, and confrontational style. ESTJs are practical, outspoken, and rule-oriented, aligning with demands for evidence ("SHOW YOUR WORK") and a commanding, no-nonsense tone. What’s their emotional intelligence? (Aware of others’ emotions, adaptable?) Low to moderate. Aware enough to target emotional weak spots ("Their fear is palpable"), but lacks adaptability or empathy—responses are rigid and hostile. Do they show leadership tendencies? (Decisive, guiding, inspiring?) Minimal. Decisive in tone ("Take it to the bank"), but no guiding or inspiring qualities—more focused on tearing down than building up. Are they motivated by social status? (Seeking respect, competing?) Yes, moderately. Competes to "win" arguments ("I’ll take that as, ‘I can’t back up what I believe’"), but doesn’t explicitly seek respect—more about dominance. What’s their risk tolerance? (Bold vs. cautious, comfortable with uncertainty?) High. Boldly provocative ("I’ll make your head into a canoe") and comfortable escalating conflicts, suggesting little fear of backlash. What’s their moral/ethical framework? (Fairness, empathy, or utilitarian?) Fairness with a twist. Emphasizes legality ("Which law did he break?") and accountability ("SHOW YOUR WORK"), but lacks empathy. Seems utilitarian in prioritizing argument wins over kindness. Do they show cognitive biases? (Confirmation bias, black-and-white thinking?) Yes. Confirmation bias in anti-Trump posts (e.g., Epstein links) and black-and-white thinking ("You MAGA types have been conned")—no middle ground. Are they creative or conformist? (Original vs. conventional?) Moderately creative. Sarcastic quips ("Wal*Martyrs," "Dumb and Dumber 4") show wit, but arguments stay within predictable political/wrestling tropes. What’s their attachment style? (Secure, anxious, avoidant?) Avoidant. Distant and dismissive, no sign of seeking approval or connection—just confrontation. How do they respond to stress? (Calm, lashing out, withdrawing?) Lashing out. Escalates with insults and sarcasm under pressure (e.g., "Grow up, kid" to a challenge). Any cultural influence? (Language/values hinting at background?) American, likely urban/liberal-leaning. References to U.S. politics (Trump, Harris, EVs), wrestling culture, and internet slang ("dingbat," "shorteyes") suggest a contemporary American context, possibly with a coastal or progressive bent.

The issue is "fixed" at least for now. They're getting multiple top end P4P kids, most recently they got a relatively high profile guy you may have heard of. Deluca, Ferrari the Younger, Gabe Arnold, Harvey Ludington, Bo Bassett (and hopefully Melvin Miller and Keegan Bassett). Now as to whether they'll be able to compete with PSU with that kind of talent? Up the air. PSU is the standard right now, Iowa is trying to raise their game to match.

In my opinion, the rule does more harm than good, especially at a qualifying tournament where a DQ means a season is over. As long as a wrestler is on the scale and makes weight at the correct time, is it that big of a deal if he's working out instead of sitting in the weigh-in area doing nothing? It doesn't give an advantage to be cutting 10 minutes later than the current rule set, but hurts the product to DQ the wrestlers. I also think it cheapens a UNI conference title if they win due to an OKST wrestler being DQ'd on a technicality. At the end of the day, having the best wrestlers in these tournaments is best for the sport. As long as they aren't doing anything malicious and make the weight at the correct time, let it go.

Doesn't seem fair to to the heavies especially Schultz. Does Wkn have an underwear chart?

Hey gang - I exceeded my quota post last week and so got locked out of the discussion on Wednesday, so sorry for cutting out. What I did in the meantime is jumped into completing the dataset and upgrading analysis. I believe I have now gotten ALL of the matches for all the D1 wrestlers. I went through every team's schedule on Track and downloaded all the results from every event that had matchups of D1 wrestlers. I also have a ton of matches of non-D1 wrestlers, but they are not quite as complete. If I found an event that had maybe 1 D1 squad there (maybe JV) and the all the opponents were non-D1, I tended to pass by it. But if there were matchups between D1 wrestlers mixed in, I did always grab all of them, even if they weren't D1 opponents. As a result, I do have a lot of guys who are from non-D1 school or even unattached to a school who have matches in the database. One thing I did to make life more manageable was to cull all the matches where it was a non-D1 wrestler who only showed up once. These matches do not contribute to the rankings, and just lead to a lot more baggage. That was something like 1200 matches that I identified. I spent the past week downloading all the scores, formatting them into a style I can use, and then cleaning them up. You gotta get rid of all the byes and the injury defaults and the medical forfeits. Also, while it is convenient to use all the scores from trac, depending on the details they don't always format like they should. Moreover, sometimes the input data is weird, because you get guys who are sometimes listed as wrestling for, for example, Navy, but other times they are listed for the Navy Wrestling Club (depending on the event). So I had to go through all the wrestlers and find the ones who were listed on multiple "teams" and consolidate them onto a single card (my goal here is to evaluate wrestlers, so I don't worry about whether events count toward the NCAA or not; as long as they are on the mat trying, I include their results). The other issue is that they get entered in, depending on who is entering, with different names, so is it Josh or Joshua? Well, they are the same guy, so I tried to find all the places where they had different names for the same wrestler. I finally got it done yesterday afternoon. The final result is a database of nearly 17000 wrestling matches with more than 3800 wrestlers. This is massive. But I've get things set up to calculate. It will take a while, and there are some things to work on (I still don't have conference tournaments added yet, but I'll get there). But in the meantime, there are things to learn...

How I roll

My skull just got thicker. That counts, right?

In any other sport's rankings or standings, the team or the guy with the best overall results is higher. Only in wrestling do we put freak-out emphasis on the thing we saw 5 minutes ago, assuming that must be the "actual" truth, rather than only a piece of the puzzle. Bartlett/Hardy is a definite no-brainer: Head-to-head: Bartlett 1-0, Hardy 0-1 vs. Top 20: Bartlett 8-1, Hardy 8-3 Ramos/Lilledahl is trickier: Head-to-head: Lilledahl 1-0, Ramos 0-1 vs. Top 20: Ramos 9-1 (4 bonus wins, 1 bonus loss), Lilledahl 6-2 (3 bonus wins, 1 bonus loss) In true standings, head-to-heads and common opponent transitive W/L's are equal because you've earned just as much and they are just as predictive (only if all else is equal do you then weigh head-to-head more). Above, head-to-head and Vombaur round-robin cancel each other out in the Bartlett/Hardy discussion. Same for head-to-head and the McCrone round-robin in Ramos/Lilledahl. Take those results away, and we're left with an undefeated wrestler up against a wrestler with losses in both cases. We're not trying to figure out the linear heavyweight champ here. It's rankings based on all inputs.

FIFY, since I see all three of these as an absolute win...

@666 With Or Without You

Remember, at one time we got no coverage....Big Ten, NCAA's....nothing.....it's getting better....."baby steps" I guess....we just have to keep putting our 2 cents in. You have coverage of Big12, Pac12, ACC now, but it's all split up, so to view it all you have to pay for it. But it's like I've said in defending Flo/Track. It costs a lot more to travel to, get tickets and lodging than it does to pay annual or monthly fees to view what interests you....same thing with high school state tournaments NFHS. That's my story and I'm stickin' to it!

I dunno. I do agree with much of this. But I don't share your view that Iowa is doing so wonderfully, and I don't think we need to put on the kid gloves with regard to Iowa. We can respect them without treating them as beyond criticism. In fact, if you believe as I do that a strong and competitive Iowa is good for the program, then we do them a disservice by not pointing out where they are falling short. For example, I don't think it's mean spirited to point out that Iowa is doing a below-average job developing talent. Their assistant coaches aren't talented enough to make their good wrestlers great. They also lack breadth of knowledge, as everyone on staff is either (a) a Brands, or (b) a Brands product who learned most of what he knows from a Brands. They've badly neglected the HWC, which is nearly non-existent, so now they are light years behind PSU in terms of the quality of practice partners. And worst of all, Iowa has badly harmed its culture, cohesion and wrestler loyalty by their extreme reliance on the portal, which they use to not just fill gaps, but also to run loyal longtime teammates out of town in favor of one-year paid wonders who have no real affinity for Iowa. Their recruiting is OK but still substandard, probably because recruits aren't seeing any sort of "Iowa style," just a collection of NIL-lured one-offs while the homegrown guys look over their shoulder, wondering if they're next. That doesn't mean they're all wrong. Keeping Lee around was a good move, and Bassett is a great get -- after huge effort. They're ahead of the curve on women's wrestling too, which over time will pay dividends on the men's side. But their problems run too deep to ignore. They're good, but make no mistake: they are neither strong nor thriving, just propped up by money. Take away their Nichols-bought mercenaries, and they're mid-tier, behind Illinois. So what to do? --The Brands brothers are fine but duplicative. Either cut one loose or put Terry in charge of the HWC full-time. --Clean house among the assistant coaches. --Go on a Portal diet: tell Nichols and your other donors you want to use the $ spent on future Parcos, Buchanans and Teemers to fund your infrastructure, namely coaches and HWC. --As for coaching, use those dollars to hire some of the best assistants in the country. Let them coach, don't get in their way, and hold them accountable. Cut it out with hiring only Iowa grads: diversify. --Dump time and money and staff into the HWC. Fill it out with a couple top coaches, and make it a go-to destination. The guys on your RTC roster are de facto coaches and your best practice partners. Coaches like DT get this, which is why OSU is passing Iowa at warp speed. --For heaven's sake, stop running your own recruits out of town. Show them some loyalty, and make it clear you expect loyalty back from them. --Rebuild your identity. Do things that make Iowa distinctive, whether in moves or style or the type of recruits you go after. Bassett can help show the way. When wrestlers feel a part of something, NIL offers are less apt to pull them away. --Getting young guys from the portal is fine, but with upperclassmen, the portal should be used only as a last resort to fill actual holes in the lineup, not to upgrade from an actual Iowa recruit. If your recruit hasn't performed up to snuff, the staff should take responsibility for failing to coach him up sufficiently. Starters should worry about losing their spot to a backup, not to some grad student from ASU or Oklahoma. Look, I don't like Iowa. At all. But I do respect them and want them to be strong, as that is better for the health of college wrestling, and it'd be nice if they could help funnel guys onto the US world team.

SF State has/d a kid who is doing something similar to Henschel. Here is a recent video: D2 and D3 deserve WAY more promotion than they receive. D1 makes up less than 20% of all collegiate wrestling opportunities.

Like Bum Phillips said, he can take his'n and beat your'n, and then he can turn around and take your'n and beat his'n.

It's not regional qualifiers, but I'll be out at D3 Champs tweeting out stats and data live. Should be a great time and can't wait. (I'll also be out at the women's NCWWC championship this weekend doing the same thing.) You can follow me on Bluesky