Penalize the ducks

[dunkej01]

So Flo/Nomad is writing articles to seed the B10+4 championships.

He does a nice job https://www.flowrestling.org/articles/6356506-why-vincenzo-joseph-should-be-the-3-seed-at-big-tens

but

the point he makes is that the ducks from the regular season should be penalized in the seeding of the championship.

which is fine as a concept

However, will those that duck penalize their own guys? That cant sit well in the locker room.

Can the anti-duckers actually control the seeding room when the biggest coaches in the sport could be said to be the duckers?

interesting. Interesting indeed.

 

[pish69]

I think Nomad losing his mind..

 

[aalion]

as discussed before there is no easy answer. would seeding Cenzo 3rd really 'penalize' him? it is 95% likely that there is only 1 guy who can beat him in BIGs, so seeding Cenzo 3rd isn't much of a big deal. In the semis he wrestles Wick or White. Seed him first he wrestles Massa maybe. Think Cenzo cares? The guy who cares is the guy who busted his butt to get a 6 seed and earn an auto qualifying spot instead of being seeded 10th and have to steal someone's spot. That 6th seed's reward? 2 time defending NCAA champion in the quarters.

The top guys dont care where they are seeded. Putting Stoll 10th because he hasnt wrestled anyone while recovering from injury or being uber-cautious or whatever penalizes the guy he faces in the first round, at least as much as it penalizes Stoll (assuming Stoll has managed the season to arrive at NCAAs 100% healthy).

Cael made this exact point discussing DT having to face the #1 guy in the world in round 1 at the World Championships. Said the flaw in the system to having automatic participation rules drive seedings is that the very top guys dont care who they wrestle.

 

[El-Jefe]

I can't take any analyst or opinion columnist seriously who in a professional capacity won't use his real name.

It's not like the FSB is planning to stab him with a ricin coated umbrella tip.

 

[ss7]

Who controls whether these "solutions" get implemented?

If it's the coaches, I can't imagine this ever happens. They aren't going to want to have their top guys punished for sitting out matches when they aren't healthy.

I can't imagine the locker room tension (and pressure on the "fill-ins") when Back-Up A loses to an unranked guy because Injured Returning Finalist B is trying to get healthy.

I don't know what the solution is. But I don't like this one. And I don't think their is any chance the coaches would even seriously consider it.

 

[kingslayer_85]

I have always assumed the folks talking about ducking or assuming wrestlers are ducking are folks that never wrestled. I don't see any of this ever being implemented. In all the years of wrestling I don't think I ever saw this , what I did see were folks getting dinged up / injured.

 

[psuflyguy]

I can't take any analyst or opinion columnist seriously who in a professional capacity won't use his real name.

It's not like the FSB is planning to stab him with a ricin coated umbrella tip.

 

[Cowbell Man]

Guess I don’t need to go into the damage done to the front and backside of a tourney when seeding is done improperly.

I haven’t figured out why ducking occurs in NCAA wrestling. The system using rankings and results is pretty good. Not only that, but most who duck are in the conferences with so many automatic qualifier slots that it makes no sense. It might make more sense in a league with a weight that only the Champion gets and AQ.

Case in point I have seen blantant ducking in NY HS wrestling where the power points system is used and ONLY a sectional champ gets one of the 11AQ’s to states and the other 5 go to those with the highest points. Simplification of the process....but when you don’t give wrestlers (who have been upset) a way to fight their way back on the mat to reach the big dance, you will get ducking.

 

[nitlion6]

Who controls whether these "solutions" get implemented?

If it's the coaches, I can't imagine this ever happens. They aren't going to want to have their top guys punished for sitting out matches when they aren't healthy.

I can't imagine the locker room tension (and pressure on the "fill-ins") when Back-Up A loses to an unranked guy because Injured Returning Finalist B is trying to get healthy.

I don't know what the solution is. But I don't like this one. And I don't think their is any chance the coaches would even seriously consider it.

Seeding Nolf 3rd and Kemerer 6th at NCAAs means there was a group last year who took the MFF to a Big10s tie for 6th seriously.

Coaches are fans and as a group have a diverse set of opinions.

 

[aalion]

Which is why it shouldn’t be formulaic. The coaches know more than anyone what a reasonable seed is for a guy like Snyder vs guys like Cenzo or Stoll or whom ever the ducking target I’d the day might be. Seeds are supposed to primarily help ensure you don’t get the best wrestlers all in 1 side of the bracket while also trying to reward wrestlers who earned spots with an “easier path”. That’s why you do it. It is the latter that is an issue though - since the brackets are zero sum. Helping 1 wrestler or penalizing 1 wrestler impacts all of the wrestlers... there is no easy answer which is why the smart people should be the ones doing it.

 

[dunkej01]

Seeding Nolf 3rd and Kemerer 6th at NCAAs means there was a group last year who took the MFF to a Big10s tie for 6th seriously.

Coaches are fans and as a group have a diverse set of opinions.

I dont think Big 10+4 committee and the NCAA seeding committee are the same animals.....and I dont think the results of both committees would be the same.

apples vs oranges.....some may say

 

[ss7]

Seeding Nolf 3rd and Kemerer 6th at NCAAs means there was a group last year who took the MFF to a Big10s tie for 6th seriously.

Coaches are fans and as a group have a diverse set of opinions.

For individual cases, sure. But as a defined policy? I just don't see it.

And while Nolf's seed was lowered because of his injury, only Hidlay (undefeated) and Lavalee (OT loss to Hidlay) were seeded above him. He was still the top seeded B1G wrestler.

It doesn't seem like they considered the matches he missed to be losses - which would have included Ohio State, Iowa, and Buffalo duals, then Pantaleo and Kemerer at B1Gs (although we could probably throw Kemerer out for also forfeiting).

I'm not saying coaches don't think guys should get their seed lowered if they are injured (especially if still injured going into the postseason). I'm saying I don't think coaches are going to install an official system in which missed matches (or losses by backups) count as losses for the "starter".