Red Blades

Lost in all the fuss over the top seeds, Brendan Furman is seeded 9th at 285, considerably lower than his EIWA average ranking would have put him (6th), and puts him against the 1 seed in the quarters IF he gets past the 8th seed Knighton-Ward in the first round (Furman was also at a disadvantage due to only wrestling part of the season, as Fernandes was originally the starter) So yes, the system works against Cornell in some cases, and at 285 could cost them potential team points or even a qualifying slot. As for Ungar - there is no figuring him seeded over Glory, but past that, seeding the next 4 at 125 could pretty much be a random draw, and Ungar still has to get past quarters and semis to even face Glory. If seeding holds, he gets Sotelo of Harvard in the semis - no easy task, nor would be Babin from Columbia. I think the Big Red fans figure - sometimes the Seeding gods giveth, and sometimes they taketh; but the gods of War and Thunder are the ones that matter most.

OK, as far as Brignola having lesser chances facing Yianni than he might have facing Zopf - I would agree. But to generalize that into "hurting guys at smaller schools", well, I hardly consider Lehigh a "small school", at least in terms of wrestling stature (although some might argue that point in recent years). But also, Brignola lost to Zapf already (11-4, a point short of a major), so the degree of difference here goes from slim to almost none. More to the point - Brignola has a 62% winning percentage. There may be quite a few others more deserving of that at large qualifying slot. As for 125 - the bigger mystery there is not so much Unger getting the 1 seed (well, OK, that is BIG a mystery!), as much as how did Bailey, who is ranked higher, end up seeded behind 8. Max Leelee, American and 9. Micah Roes, Binghamton? Flip one or two of those places, and I think Bailey fans would be happier; but in this case, I think the seeding process used has actually helped the wrestlers from the smaller, lesser-known programs (which I suspect is in part the intent of the process used). Bailey is hurt here by his own lack of record - he's only listed at 7-9 (less than 50%) so how do you argue that he deserves a spot anyhow? And with 6 AQ slots at this weight available - if Bailey really deserves one of them, he's got plenty of opportunity to wrestle his way in (even though he did not earn an AQ slot for the conference). So while I get that the seeding IS way off in some instances, and I would certainly like to see some kind of appeal process to re-adjust by the "eye test" (whatever THAT might be ), on the whole I don't share the same level of outrage over lesser ranked or less prominent wrestlers/programs being hurt. On the other hand - it seems the guys who benefit most from this process are the guys who wrestled a full schedule, and especially a full conference schedule - so count me among the fans in favor of the process. STOP THE DUCK!

How exactly does it do that?

That's some crazy stuff... I'm guessing some of this get's sorted out in the final seeding meeting, althought from a Cornell perspective - I can't say it's all bad, just silly.

is that an official stat? Duck percentage?

Aye, but there lies the rub - are the rankings that good? The way I see it, the top 24 guys, maybe more, are going to qualify one way or another. But the current system also provides a way for the guys who might be on the wrong side of the bubble to "play their way" in. This also makes the conference tournament more meaningful. I do think the current system is also WAY better than the old system (was replaced when, say 15-20 years ago?) where the conference allocations were awarded based on prior year's AA count per conference, and the conferences could allocate among the weight classes as they chose to. And I like that each conference gets that minimum one qualifier per weight class. It gives every conference some representation, and a chance to prove that sometimes the pundits are wrong. Let's go, LIU!!

Who's on first.

Yianni hit 100 wins earlier this year.

I'm not so sure - - RPI - head-to-head competition - quality wins - conference tournament placement - results versus common opponents - win percentage. As of now, Fix and Vito look like they have the advantage in RPI. If Fix and Vito both win out the remaining schedule, and win their conference tournaments, there may be little else to separate them.

In part, yes, the Coaches' Rankings are a factor: Source: NCAA releases midseason coaches’ rank and RPI for 2023 Division I Wrestling Championships | NCAA.com

Hmmm... Cornell needs another 184 lbr right now... I wonder if they can finagle this?

Does anyone else think - the system works pretty well the way it is?

Al you really need is to cruise I-80 from the GWB to Des Moines.

Everyone would need to be at 100% - and when does that ever happen? 184, 285 are concerns as of now. On the other hand - 125 and 141 are turning out to exceed preseason expectations.

Except I think these results do count unofficially, by way of the Coaches Rankings.

You are right, I somehow missed counting a couple of 125 matches - so he's in better shape than I thought, with just under 8 matches at weight, and a couple of high ranking wins. He may not get the RPI, but he'll clearly have enough for a coaches' ranking after the EIWA tournament, if not sooner. I don't see anyone else getting a Head-to-head win over him, and winning % should be tops. That should be enough to put him at the top.

The matches at 133 don't count towards RPI or record. As of now he has 4 matches against D1 opponents at 125, and none of them ranked. I think that's going to haunt him in seeding. It might not matter, but if he get's a bad early draw, and is hurting with the weight cut...

I thought it may be of general interest here - today is the last day on the job for Cornell Athletic Director Andy Noel. Also a former wrestling coach at Cornell, I think Andy has been a big part of Cornell Wrestling's success over the past decades. Here's a little tribute video posted on Facebook: Andy Noel. Thanks for all you've done, Andy!

Wow, I remember those - late 1960's?

Wait, what's happening next weekend?!

D3, great job on the PBP - we'll make a Cornell fan out of you yet!

I think if VT can win the swing matches at 125 and 141 it's a 5-5 split; with some bonus points at 157 or 184 (especially if Loew is out) that could do it for them.

Wrestlestat predicts this as a 18-13 Cornell victory. Possible marquee matchups at 141 (Yianni vs Henson) 174 (Foca vs. Lewis) and 184 (Loew vs Bolen) assuming the starters all go. (?) 125 (Ungar vs. Ventresca) and 141 (Cornella vs. Crook) also look like toss-ups. Thoughts?

Right, I'm thinking back to the example of Jesse Delgado a number of years back (2016?) where I believe he came in unseeded as a returning national champ due to lack of coaches ranking and RPI. There was a lot of discussion then IIRC about the fairness or appropriatness of this. More recently the tournament does get seeded top to bottom, but even so, with no ranking or RPI, the consequences would be pretty severe. Different situation with Delgado, as I believe the issue for him was injury rather than weight - but the need to maintain a minimum match count at weight is still in effect.

Presently, a minimum number of matches are needed for a coaches ranking (I believe it has been 8?), which means, in effect, minimum matches to be seeded - is that enough of a boundary?