ugarles

great case i'm convinced

I usually get frustrated by stalling chants (it's become a plague from the Cornell home crowd) but in the Ramirez-Cassella EIWA semi they were appropriate. Cassella spent 7 minutes in literal reverse.

lol pretty much god i hate watching him

zapf is a shoo-in

Hate 1 but like a modified 2. The problem with forcing someone up at 1 minute is that there is no margin for error on the RT. I'd be more lenient until, say, 1:30 or 2:00 or something. I'd also prefer an international-style "on your feet" to a stalling call when the officials think the attempts to turn are either hopeless or acting. Relatedly, while I do think stalling should be called more aggressively, I hate when the guy on bottom is called for stalling when the guy on top has him immobilzed. What's he supposed to do, call in an air strike? His legs are in the air and bent in a way I wouldn't wish on an enemy, his arm is behind his back, he can taste the solution they cleaned the mat with and you think he's stalling?

Andrew Berreyesa, Northern Colorado at 174. - Quality win over Cassella - 23 in last CR - Greco style makes him dangerous against anyone and flashy feet-to-back pins are fun. - He gets to hang out with 2 teammates from NoCo and 7* from Cornell. * or 8, see above

I don't think it's that granular. IIRC, this would count as a tie with each getting 5 points.

i do think the quick stalemates in international wrestling are better than the much more generous times granted by ncaa refs. you don't even have to be in a stalemate for the ref to blow the whistle and yell at both guys for being boring.

i don't buy it. ankle grabs and chest wraps and other defensive moves are not retreats, they are counters. keeping your distance, backing up to the slightest flinch, retreating out of bounds? that's stalling. active wrestling that prevents a score has to be allowed. that's what wrestling is. you're engaged with your opponent.

I didn't look at the bracket and wrestlestat has the matches in reverse order. i was shocked that he went to SV against Lewan after getting pinned in :38. Reversing the order and assuming an injury the results make a lot more sense.

i think Don't you need 8 matches to even be considered for an at-large? I think that precludes Carr. As for Lee, it depends on whether he stays in CR since he isn't eligible for RPI but does have a win over an AQ (Gilcher).

Brendan Furman, Cornell. - Finished 7th in a 6-bid conference. - Wins over fellow at-large pool members Stefanik and Knighton-Ward. - 0-8 against AQ's, so no signature wins BUT 9-0 against the rest, so no bad losses. - Currently 34 on the wrestlestat RPI, but that's an approximation so he could be top 33 for consideration purposes. - 30-33 of the pre-tournament CR had losing records at their conference tournaments, so Furman could get into the CR for consideration purposes. - Qualified for the 2020 tournament before the pandemic stole his trip. - Injury replacement for a 2022 R12 (Fernandes) which kept him from building up his resume at, say, the Binghamton Open or the wrestlebacks at CKLV. - the MAC guys in the at-large pool only beat each other for semi-quality wins and have bad out of conference losses - I want this for him

he beat him twice. i think this one is unambiguous. more interesting question is ramirez or griffith given Shane's loss in the Pac 12 final.

laughing because it hit me as i was reading other people's posts that the EWL doesn't exist anymore and those teams are folded into the MAC. I've edited my rough projections in the quote to account for the change. I think it overstates the MAC in one way, because a lot of the guys are barely meeting criteria and also understates it because I didn't see Buffalo on what I guess is an old EWL list so I thought my memory was failing in a different way and assigned their guys to the EIWA but don't want to unwind it. Can't wait for the NCAA to release the list and free me from this mental prison.

RIght. That's the exercise I didn't want to do lol. I used the wrestlestat RPI as well because it is presumably more current than the last official NCAA release ... but who knows.

I used the last official CR, which I think is what is on Wrestlestat. What do you use for win% and how do you whittle down to 28/29? I didn't want to do the work of the incremental steps from 30/30/.700 to find the actual bubble because that's the area most subject to change when the new rankings come out.

Thanks, @ILLINIWrestlingBlog. I don't have a strong feeling one way or the other! The fact is, most of the B1G has at least 2 criteria so they dominate the pre-allocations. The fact that the Pac 12 looks so weak probably goes a long way to explaining why the B1G and B12 look to get so many AQs. I haven't really paid attention to the internal dynamics of the B1G because I'm an EIWA guy (Let's go Red!) All I did was take a look at the Wrestlestat compilation of CR/RPI and include everyone either in the top 30 in both criteria or in the top 30 in one with a win % over .700. Out of curiosity, I also included anyone over .700 outside of the top 30 CR because nobody's RPI can change until after the conference tournaments but the new CR can scramble the bottom of the pre-allocation list.

Well, I couldn't help myself. Using Wrestlestat's RPI estimates, this spreadsheet has tabs for all of the weights and all of the people that could potentially earn a pre-allocation. https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1g7fJRHTrJOg6q9Vx2ftxVYDFiJBEB3HMyic4IoGCLc0/edit?usp=sharing Explanation of format: The first two columns - name and conference are self-explanatory. The third column lists the wrestlers winning percentage* and the fourth notes any wrestler who has a top 30 RPI or a winning percentage of .700 or better but was not in the top 30 of the last CR. A caveat that there is a max of 29 pre-allocated spots and one has to go to EWL/MAC/Pac12/SoCon even if they don't have someone who meets the criteria, so there are more wrestlers who have 2 of 3 criteria than there are pre-allocated spots and this is before the last CR anyway, so the guys at the back of the top 30 who had a rough week or two may find themselves replaced. I also included some guys from weaker conferences who have a .700 winning percentage that technically need CR but don't have nearly a good enough RPI for the coaches to add them to the top 30 now, if they hadn't done it already, so no need to tell me that Palumbo or Stoltzfus are longshots. That said, Here are the splits by weight, pending the new CR: 125: ACC 3, B10 9, B12 6, EIWA 4, EWL 1, MAC 2, Pac12 3, SoCon 2 133: ACC 3, B10 9, B12 6, EIWA 7, EWL 1, MAC 1, Pac12 3, SoCon 2 141: ACC 4, B10 10, B12 7, EIWA 5, EWL 2, MAC 1, Pac12 1, SoCon 1 149: ACC 5, B10 9, B12 7, EIWA 3, EWL 2, MAC 2, Pac12 2, SoCon 1 157: ACC 3, B10 11, B12 8, EIWA 3, EWL 2, MAC 2, Pac12 1, SoCon 1 165: ACC 5, B10 10, B12 7, EIWA 4, EWL 1, MAC 1, Pac12 2, SoCon 2 174: ACC 3, B10 7, B12 7, EIWA 5, EWL 3, MAC 2, Pac12 2, SoCon 2 184: ACC 6, B10 9, B12 6, EIWA 5, EWL 1, MAC 1, Pac12 1, SoCon 1 197: ACC 5, B10 9, B12 7, EIWA 6, EWL 1, MAC 1, Pac12 3, SoCon 1 285: ACC 4, B10 9, B12 8, EIWA 5, EWL 1, MAC 1, Pac12 1, SoCon 1 Feel free to comment here or on the spreadsheet if you think I made any mistakes (and I probably did). * Also using Wrestlestat's calculations for win%, which can be off for these purposes if a wrestler moved up or down in weight. Looking at Patrick Glory's profile, they give the all-D1 winning % even though a handful of matches were at 133, so, grain of salt - especially for the guys right around .700.

come on man, i said "not it." OK, at least can someone answer a technical question? Yianni is 12-1 ... is that enough matches for a conference allocation or is he going to steal someone else's bid?

Can only tell you what seems obvious: he came into Cornell as a great recruit and when healthy has been a really good, if defensively-oriented, wrestler. Unfortunately, he's rarely healthy and had two seasons in a row cut short by injury and though he was technically healthy to start the year, he wasn't wrestling up to his prior results. It's unclear if there was a distinct injury this year or if he just isn't all the way back, but after the Princeton dual Handlovic has stepped in as the starter. As for the Cornell-tOSU dual, the only interesting matches were at 174* and 184 where both sides sent out backups.** Two well-matched fights that went down to the wire. As I said on the Cornell board, very cool in a Daktronics Open kind of way. 133 was the only worthwhile fight in terms of national implications and Arujau wasn't tested. * Cornell got called out for sitting so many guys but Ohio State also sat Kharchla, Smith and Hoffman. Neither coach put anyone at risk with the exception of 133. ** Hatcher is technically the Cornell starter but only because of Loew's shoulder injury.

Paging SHP ... is the Pirate or anyone else projecting the preliminary AQ allocations? I'd love to see a list based on the current win % and the last RPI/CR adjusted for the guys who have reached the 15 match minimum in the interim but do not want to be the guy who compiles it. Because I said "not it" first, you can't make me do it.