Offthemat

If you’re wrestling 149 or 184 - yes.

It appears to me that it effectively removes the 149 weight and adds a couple of heavies.

That happens as is. The brackets are often blown up in the early rounds. Carr went down early last year; how many fringe AAs did he send home empty handed?

Would it make that much difference at what point the losers enter consolations.

Yes. I would reward the conference champs of every conference. 3rd place? Not so much. It might be a draw for some of the lesser conferences recruiting. I agree that wrestling is a tough sport and I think coaches are doing what they can to prevent injuries. John Smith recently talked about the point where takedowns are called having an effect on injuries. So, just like other sports, injuries and lineups during conference competition has an affect on conference championships. Thereby increasing the importance of team performance while remaining an individual sport. If you’re skipping matches because they don’t matter, with this, that would change.

For NCAAs, definitely seed conference champs above any 3rd place finishers, maybe 2nd.

My proposed formula works like this: Seeding at conference tournaments are based on conference duals only. If wrestler A appears in 5 duals and wins all, and wrestler B wrestles 3 matches and wins 1, whichever wrestler enters the tournament is seeded based on a 6-2 record. If there are two wrestlers with identical records and no head to head match to go on, the wrestler from the team with the better conference record seeds ahead of the other. Putting emphasis on individual and team performance in duals for conference tournament seeding may help to reduce ducking. In the end, it’ll still boil down to coaches and wrestlers.

I like that.

If it has no effect on seeding at Nationals, would fewer wrestlers duck duals and consolation matches? Don’t most wrestlers want to wrestle?

At a discount?

So a possible #1 Big12 vs #3 Big12 final.

Good point. This is the main thought I had, but it doesn’t do much for the dual matches. A conference dual championship? Just can’t come up with a reasonable solution for emphasizing duals more. That would still be okay to give the easier path to the champions; might make recruiting better for smaller conferences.

Would it put more emphasis on dual matches and reduce conference tournament MFFs if only the finalists from each tournament were seeded and the others were drawn?

How bout Konner Doucet? He didn’t win this weekend but kept it close with two big guys.

Surber wrestled Ferrari in their first ranking match. Ferrari won, but not by much. John Smith said he would find a way to get him on the mat. That turned out to be hwt. last year. Surber said he’s trying to break the habit of wrestling like a hwt. Looks like he managed well today. He beat Zack Elam at the Big12 Conference Tournament last year.

I understand and applaud the scheduling of the match, but not the venue nor broadcast. If is a big word. In defense of espn, the Fairfield-Quinnipiac game drew almost twice the attendance. I have no knowledge of Consuelo money or tv.

I thought it meant death, destruction, and mayhem.

Doing a good job D3.

Espnu carried the Fairfield-Quinnipiac game instead.

Televised? On pay per view? How big was that audience? I wonder why they bothered to have it at all. The announcer said the crowd was small.

Yeah, well, OSU had a backup for Blankenship.

Nobody’s intimidated to wrestle them at 125.

Now I’m hungry.

It’s out of the bag now.

Probably wasn’t for the snow.