nhs67

I don't see how Sloan isn't the #1 honestly. He earned it.

Thank you for the time and effort you put in to this @ILLINIWrestlingBlog. I could throw out criticisms here and there, however I will refrain and express my gratitude towards the content. It is quite refreshing. I will throw out one insight, though: They have never ignored the prevailing wisdom of head to head matches from out of conference dual matches. I am referencing the Mendez/Byrd(133) and Paddy G/Gilcher(157) 'seeding' projections. I honestly wish they would seed based off team dual meet results, though.

It was a live GoogleDoc snake draft.

I think it was 11 as well, due to one no-show. @VakAttack Where do I send my moneys?

Greetings Gents, Trying to figure out who all took part in our pickem at last years NCAAs. Some people changed their usernames, so it is tough to follow. A few I recall(?)... @Idaho @ionel @VakAttack @flyingcement @MPhillips

Didn't the B1G qualify 14 at two weights last year? Can't improve on 100%.

Nomad has been doing it on the Twittersphere.

Oh, I know. Similar, but not the same: UofM's Anthony Biondo wrestled 145 as a High School senior in 2005-06 and 197 as a Collegiate senior in 2010-11.

Also, I thought Brawley had one more year? They get another Lamer in at that weight so a drop would still be fitting.

He weighed five pounds less on Day 2 of the Collegiate Duals (189.0lbs). I don't think he goes heavyweight.

Very cool, very nice. I think they only lose 2 guys next year, too. With a lineup shuffle back down to get a healthy Kemp in it ends up being only losing 1.

Which could be miles in a marathon for both of them. I was also referring to non-collegiate matches. Sasso is nothing but a bag o' meat against Johnny D.

Huh? Hasn't Sasso lost via CLOBBER every single time against Johnny D? Like... not even close to being considered competitive?

I also want to see Elam get a chance to avenge his result prior yo NCAAs.

I could see that as well. I had said Elam 1 and Sloan 2 based on the Andy Smith result, however weighting conference results makes more sense.

1 - 2 - 3 seem clear cut to me. 4 - 5 - 6 can be in any order. Surber has a shit tonne of losses on the year. One good win won't earn him a Top 3 seed. Eliminating Surber from the 'three' OP mentions due to multiple conference losses makes it easy. Elam has win over the guy who beat Sloan and over Batista. Sloan is 19-1 where Batista is 14-4. 4-5-6 could be any order. If they put emphasis on winning percentage or even inner conference winning percentage then Surber could end up the 6. I think they will weight the win over Elam (as they should) and give him the 4. I know I put him at 5 and not 4 in the screenshot here, but I do think they give him the 4.

Both Hall and Joseph (and anyone who was wrestling their senior year) used their last year of eligibility up the cancelled year. It was a ridiculous situation, but it is the truth. Massa, Amine, and Micic all were Olympic Redshirting that year otherwise they would have also been done that year too.

Who else had O'Toole for the duck? That beating? That was clearly a stunt double.

I don't expect Carr-O'Toole, honestly.

This thread might be the first one ever in which JC isn't trolling Penn State. Holy shit.

Which all of these are preposterous. Kerk is #2. There isn't an 'at-best' or 'at-worst' sort of scenario with it. RBY and Johnny D a case could be made for #2 at worst. Fix over RBY for #1 makes very little sense, however if we base off of the results this year alone and not the fact that over the course of 14+ minutes the prior two seasons he couldn't sniff a takedown then okay - I guess? Their only common opponent this season is Ragusin. Fix won via Pin over Ragusin whereas RBY 'only' pulled in a 4-2 Decision. Gomez as the #1 over Johnny D makes more sense now that Johnson is taking more losses and you aren't doing a three-way round robin. Johnny D does have a higher bonus rate on top of being the defending champion, though. Johnny D is 4-1 against the Top 33, whereas Gomez is 5-1 (Using wrestlestat and not including an Injury Default to Thomas here), so that is a wash as well. Using H2H on the two makes a lot if sense. Lower that #2 makes zero sense, let alone off the list entirely - for whatever bullshit reason(s).

It's obvious there is no oversight on this. Obvious #1s would be Lee, RBY, Johnny D, Robb, O'Toole/Carr, Starocci, Nino, Parris. A simple glance over to see if any of those are egregiously out would only take a few minutes.

Also, we could allow Intermat, Flowrestling, and Wrestlestat to put their 'rankings' to work inside of our 'formula' as well. #1 gets 12 points, #2 gets 11 points, etc.

Greetings All, Who would be interested in doing something like a 'Forums' ranking panel? We would submit our Top 12 (let's not get too fancy) to a non-biased intermediary (Wkn?). Honestly we could even pick ~15 or so from on here specifically that I think are well respected enough to partake. Any obvious attempts at sandbagging a gents ranking (RBY, Parris, O'Toole, Lee ranked like 4 or 5 would be good indicators) would discredit a voters entire ballot for every weight. Here are a few caveat I can think of: - Rankings would have to be submitted through the messaging system here so we could follow the Username(s). - Only rank Top 12 - Only 'well-known' posters would be eligible. - Obvious troll attempts disregards entire ballot Who would be interested in partaking? It would be cool to do three (3) sets to close out the season - one the week of Conferences (released ~Thursday, March 2nd), one the week after Conferences (released ~Thursdsy, March 9th), and one the week after Nationals (released ~Thursday, March 23rd). Sorry not sorry to nominate you @Wrestleknownothing. I can't think if someone as well respected to collect the data, on here, as you. It is okay for you to say no.