Wrestleknownothing

OK, then I feel compelled to point out that the fat fingers feel very much like a Freudian slip.

you have time to fix

Things that might make you go hmmmm, if they happen. The last coaches' ranking had Starocci a unanimous #1. That means at least three of Bormet, Dresser, Schwab, and Ryan voted Starocci #1. Since then Starocci and Keckeisen have each wrestled only their three conference tournament matches. Starocci beat the CR #4 by DEC (SV 8-5), #9 by MD (12-2), and #28 by TF (18-1). Keckeisen beat the CR #3 by DEC (8-1), #30 by TF (20-5), and Unranked by TF (20-4). If they reverse the order and make Keckeisen #1 in the next CR, you have to ask yourself based on what new information?

As long as we have you, what is the criteria for deciding whether the QW is split 20/0, 15/5, or 10/10?

Because I know nothing. How about these guys instead? Big 12 Conference Doug Schwab 184 Big 12 Conference Kevin Dresser 184 Big Ten Conference Sean Bormet 184 Big Ten Conference Tom Ryan 184 The last time around Starocci was unanimous. So either Schwab voted for Starocci to be #1 or Schwab's was the low that was thrown out.

That is a good point and one I had forgotten

I found those guys. Mystery solved. They were in the building next to Welsh-Ryan. Sitting in front of a big picture window. It looked like mission control with the set up they had. If you turned the wrong way out of the building, you ran smack dab into them. Another thing I found annoying was when the officials would stop it and do their own review. Make a decision about their previously made decision. Then turn to the coach who it went against and ask them if they wanted to challenge the decision about the decision. That would then kick it to the mystery man in that other building to make a decision about the decision about the decision. A process only a bureaucrat could love.

Amen. January 17 was a perfect example.

Taking three hours to decided 10 winners is bruuuuuuutal bad TV. And pretty bad in person. Sitting there we kept commenting to each other how the B1G set up makes for such bad TV that you will never capture more than the diehards.

Not sure. That is a copy/paste from the NCAA doc.

last year they released the CR and RPI the same day as the seeding show (Wed the week before) around noon.

The fate of Starocci and Keckeisen is likely in the hands of these four men: Big 12 Conference Mark Branch 197 Big 12 Conference Obenson Blanc 197 Big Ten Conference Alex Clemsen 197 Big Ten Conference Chris Bono 197

Ultimately Starocci v Keckeisen may come down to the opinions of these four men. Big 12 Conference Mark Branch 197 Big 12 Conference Obenson Blanc 197 Big Ten Conference Alex Clemsen 197 Big Ten Conference Chris Bono 197

To be clear, it does not count for quality wins, win%, or RPI. But there is nothing to prevent a coach from counting it when they do the rankings. They are free to rank however they want, by height, by looks, by net worth, or even by who they think is best. Who is to say a coach is not including that result in his consideration? After all it is very hard for humans to pretend they do not know something. Many behavioral economic studies have demonstrated this phenomena. And coaches' rank is a bit of a cheat code for seeding.

Are you sure about that last part? I have wondered, but I cannot find anything that says one way or the other.

Mar. 10 7:59 a.m. Portal to finalize notes for seeding and ranking closes. Mar. 10 8 a.m. Ranking portal open for Coaches Ranking Panel. Mar. 10 10 p.m. Ranking portal closes for Coaches Ranking Panel. Mar. 10 - 12 Selections for the 2025 NCAA Division I Wrestling Championships announced. Mar. 12 8 p.m. Selection Show on NCAA.com

doesn't count for what?

Yeah, I looked at the wrong list for RPI. That is Keckeisen's. QW is a category that can be split. I don't think there is enough separation for one guy getting 20 and the other getting zero. Instead it will likely be either 15/5 or 10/10. So I think Starocci has 10 (CR), Keckeisen does have 10 (RPI), they split QW 15/5 in one direction or the other. I think Starocci has more QW, but they are close enough that it will come down to the QW points tiering: I assume those columns are ORs not ANDs. So if the opponent had a 90% win, or top 5 CR, or top 5 RPI, the win is worth 6 QW points.

No, it is not different for this. That is pretty straight forward. What is not straight forward is if the committee will use their veto power to move guys up or down up to three spots from the formulaic result. 141 seems like the most likely place that will happen given the way the season played out. As for that last sentence, huh?

I say Steveson. My son was a short offensive lineman in high school, but he had a big ass and thighs allowing him to move guys around. The power comes from down low. Kerkvliet has a big ass and overpowers everyone. Well, almost everyone. Steveson has the real power down low. His ass and thighs make Kerkvliet look like a runway model. The way he effortlessly moves Kerkvliet around is amazing.

Too soon to tell. Check back in two weeks.

That is how I read it originally, but if he says it was not, then it was not.

Agreed

I apologize. I did misinterpret.