Projected Big 10 Seeds

regularfan

Well-Known Member
Jan 22, 2019
453
697
1
Not trying to create competition as I have seen others have started to do the same but I was looking at potential Big 10 seeds and did my own yesterday. I have included a wrestler's overall record, their record against who I think are going to be the starters at the weight, coaches ranking (CR), RPI, and wrestlestat wranking (WS), along with notes about why each guy is where they are. Enjoy!

125 lbs.
1. Lee (Iowa) (14-0, 7-0 Big Ten Starters):
1 CR, 1 WS; the guy is pretty good
Seeds 2-8 there is a lot of losses to guys below, wins above, splits so these are far from set in stone
2. Schroder (Pur) (24-4, 9-2 Big Ten Starters): 6 CR, 4 RPI, 5 WS; has a loss to Cronin in addition to Lee but also has a tech fall over and the second-highest coaches rank at the weight
3. P. McKee (Minn) (17-6, 5-1 Big Ten Starters): 13 CR, 13 RPI, 20 WS; this could be an interesting one. McKeee has beaten everybody below him but lost to Schroeder by tech and only has 1 match against guys below him with coach’s rank (beat Medley 4-2 in OT)
4. Cardini (Ill) (14-7, 10-2 Big Ten Starters): 21 CR, 9 RPI, 24 WS; doesn’t have coach’s rank to think he would be #4 but has beaten Cronin three times, beat Medley, beat DeAugistino, and beat Aguilar, does have a random split with Griffith who is unranked
5. Medley (Mich) (15-10, 7-6 Big Ten Starters): 26 CR, 17 RPI, 18 WS; split with DeAugustino but that win came in the most recent win and was the dual (lost at Cliff Keen), also has a loss to Aguilar
6. DeAugustino (NW) (16-7, 5-4 Big Ten Starters): 10 CR, 3 RPI, 16 WS; has the third highest coaches rank in the weight and but only win above is split with Medley, does have a loss to Aguilar (but Aguilar has other losses below my #6 seed
7. Cronin (Ind) (13-11, 5-6 Big Ten Starters): 19 CR, 22 WS; lost to DeAugustino but has wins over Aguilar and Barnett
8. Aguilar (Rut) (20-8, 4-4 Big Ten Starters): 17 CR, 12 RPI, 23 WS; has not wrestled Barnett but has the coaches rank edge to give him the 8 (not that it matters), plus the win against DeAugustino
9. Barnett (Wis) (19-7, 4-4 Big Ten Starters): 24 CR, 14 RPI, 19 WS; has no wins above him, has a pin against Thomsen for his strongest wins
10. Thomsen (Neb) (9-12, 3-6 Big Ten Starters): 31 RPI, 42 WS; no wins above him and has beaten everybody below with the exception of Cray who he did not see
11. Heinselman (OSU) (15-13, 3-6 Big Ten Starters): 44 WS; did not face Griffith and has a win over Medley and an OT loss to Medley (who split with Griffith so 11 and 12 could flip
12. Griffith (MSU) (17-13, 2-7 Big Ten Starters): 49 WS; could flip based on note above, beat Cray in addition to split with Medley
13. Cray (Md) (4-16, 1-8 Big Ten Starters): 59 WS; beat Meredith by 8-7 score for only win in conference
14. Meredith (PSU) (13-12, 0-9 Big Ten Starters): 48 WS; put it behind you and just let it rip, lost by 2 to Heinselman and in OT to Thomsen so it’s not like he is completely overmatched



133 lbs.
1. Gross (Wis) (23-1, 9-1 Big Ten Starters):
1 CR, 1 RPI, 1 WS; Interesting that his loss to DeSanto was the in the dual if that is supposed to play more than the tournament. However, he avenged that loss he has the win against Bravo-Young
2. Bravo-Young (PSU) (17-1, 6-1 Big Ten Starters): 2 CR, 3 RPI, 3 WS; only loss was to Gross, does have an official win against DeSanto regardless of how people view the result of that match
3. DeSanto (Iowa) (13-2, 6-1 Big Ten Starters): 3 CR, 2 WS; only listed with the Gross loss because not all injury defaults are created equal. However, Bravo-Young was winning at the time. Interesting to note that the coaches had Bravo-Young ranked higher than DeSanto as well.
4. Piotrowski (Ill) (22-2, 6-1 Big Ten Starters): 6 CR, 6 RPI, 5 WS; I think this spot is between Piotrowski and Lovett as Lovett lost to the top 3 and nobody else. Lovett also has better results against the common opponents for margin of victory but I feel coaches rank gives an indication as to which way this will go. 6 would be worst case scenario.
5. Rivera (NW) (8-2, 1-1 Big Ten Starters): 2 WS; Lost to Gross by a point and does have that “other” loss to Piotrowski in which he was winning. Just seems almost fitting to slot Rivera in here and and let those two battle in the quarters to see who truly is better. I could see Lovett as the #5 but I would not think Rivera falls below six because he does have 10 matches overall, just not a lot of conference matches.
6. Lovett (Neb) (13-6, 5-3 Big Ten Starters): 11 CR, 9 RPI, 8 WS; Could possibly slip to 7 since he did not face Alvarez but felt like I have been looking at him on the board for a while. I think he is somewhere between 4-7
7. Alvarez (Rut) (22-7, 6-3 Big Ten Starters): 7 CR, 7 RPI, 7 WS; beat everybody I have seeded below him except no match vs. Bryden. Got pinned by Piotrowski so there is a ceiling but I see the argument for as high as 5. Definitely no worse than a 7. Also think about how crazy this weight is that the #7 guy in the coach’s rank nationally could be that seed in the conference tournament.
8. C. Rooks (Ind) (20-10, 3-4 Big Ten Starters): 55 WS; Did split the bouts with Ford-Melton (his loss came at an Open back in November to him) which could limit him but I think the overall record gives him the seed here with Assa and Pepple also in the mix here.
9. Pepple (MSU) (16-13, 2-4 Big Ten Starters): 20 RPI, 28 WS; I have him wrestling Rooks anyway in the 8-9 to make it kind of a moot point. Healso has the win against Alvarez to give him argument for 8. Other victory in conference came against Sandoval so hasn’t face a couple of middle tier guys.
10. Dryden (Minn) (8-5, 1-3 Big Ten Starters): 53 WS; Either Assad or Dryden at this spot as the only undefeateds vs. bottom 5. They only common opponent they have is Bravo-Young who teched Dryden and won 17-9 vs. Assad but I think the overall record gives the nod to Dryden.
11. Ford-Melton (Pur) (13-12, 2-7 Big Ten Starters): 54 WS; Lost to Dryden which makes him undefeated against bottom four and I will give him the nod over Assad based on winning record and more duals
12. Assad (Mich) (4-8, 1-5 Big Ten Starters): 43 WS; the weight is over for a guy who could be as high as tenth. However, Sandoval is his only win. Could be Silva but that guy never wrestles.
13. Sandoval (Md) (10-14, 1-8 Big Ten Starters): 41 WS; Only win over Decatur who has a coaches rank.
14. Decatur (OSU) (14-8, 0-7 Big Ten Starters): 27 CR, 33 WS; crazy that a guy who has a coaches rank is this low but he did not beat any conference starters and lost to Sandoval. I don’t know how you put him higher.

141 lbs.
1. Lee (PSU) (17-0, 8-0 Big Ten Starters
): 2 CR, 7 RPI, 1 WS; Solidified the seed after beating Pletcher and obviously the coaches rank will flip from that result. Also for all you guys who give wrestlestat a hard time, they had this match right and the polls wrong. I know this is just one example, but still.
2. Pletcher (OSU) (23-1, 11-1 Big Ten Starters): 1 CR, 1 RPI, 2 WS; Lost to Lee but a ton of matches. Hit every one of top guys except Murin
Seeds 3-5 get murky but as they all beat each other (no wins above that group or losses below this group)
3. Moran (Wis) (17-4, 4-3 Big Ten Starters): 6 CR, 3 RPI, 7 WS; ranked behind Murin in the coaches rank but has the most dominant win in this trio (9-4 over Red). Loss was only 3-2 to Murin
4. Red (Neb) (14-6, 5-4 Big Ten Starters): 8 CR, 5 RPI, 5 WS; beat Murin 6-2 to get 4th spot in the seeds
5. Murin (Iowa) (11-1, 5-1 Big Ten Starters): 5 CR, 8 WS; highest ranked coaches guy but had the least dominant win. Really good quarterfinal looming if the seeds fall this way. It would not shock me to see him at three seed
6. M. McKee (Minn) (23-5, 3-5 Big Ten Starters): 3 CR, 9 RPI, 4 WS; take away the top five in the weight and McKee is the only other undefeated from this point down. Just crazy to think the six seed is third in the coaches rank
7-10 are all a group who have beaten up on each other as well and have no wins above or losses below group both I feel have a little more clarity as to what I feel should happen
7. Duncan (Ill) (16-7, 5-5 Big Ten Starters): 13 CR, 11 RPI, 22 WS; only one in this tier to wrestle other three. Has best coaches rank of the group and shutout both McKenna and Mattin. Lost 8-6 to Fillius just this weekend as he was thrown to his back.
8. C. Mattin (Mich) (13-11, 3-5 Big Ten Starters): 32 CR, 28 RPI, 32 WS; Majored McKenna but did not get to wrestle Filius
9. McKenna (NW) (7-7, 5-4 Big Ten Starters): 48 WS; doesn’t have the coaches rank but does own an 8-3 win over Filius in their head-to-head meeting
10. Filius (Pur) (17-7, 4-4 Big Ten Starters): 31 CR, 26 RPI, 38 WS; worst case scenario for a guy with a coaches rank. On the bright side, the win against Duncan on Sunday should advance the conference’s hopes of getting bids at this weight.
11. Aragona (Rut) (11-9, 2-6 Big Ten Starters): 49 WS; this spot will go to either Santos or Aragona as they did not wrestle each other but Aragona has two wins against the other ones in the bottom three
12. Santos (MSU) (13-13, 1-5 Big Ten Starters): 54 WS; either Santos or Bolivar but Santos has a .500 record as opposed to losing record
13. Bolivar (Ind) (7-11, 1-6 Big Ten Starters): 68 WS; could move up to 12 and flip with Santos. Beat Baxter by a 6-4 score
14. Baxter (Md) (6-17, 0-8 Big Ten Starters): 72 WS; is competitive with in this last group of four but a lot of fall and tech losses above that. New season starts in a couple weeks.

149 lbs.
Start off with some split results in 1-3 seeds
1. Sasso (OSU) (22-2, 10-1 Big Ten Starters): 1 CR, 7 RPI, 2 WS; I think Sasso takes this as his only conference loss was at Cliff Keen to Lee and he avenged that loss in the dual. He is also the top ranked guy in the coaches poll and so that seed represents the coaches feel about Sasso at the moment.
2. Lugo (Iowa) (17-1, 7-1 Big Ten Starters): 2 CR, 1 RPI, 4 WS; only loss all year was to Sasso in double overtime. Beat Brayton Lee by a 3-2 score in the dual meet.
3. Lee (Minn) (21-4, 5-2 Big Ten Starters): 6 CR, 5 RPI, 9 WS; has the win over Sasso but was at Cliff Keen. Beat Lee 6-4 in tournament, lost 4-2 in dual so the top three are all close which makes the one seed decision important since two and three hit in the semis if seeds hold.
4. Storr (Mich) (17-4, 5-2 Big Ten Starters): 8 CR, 12 RPI, 10 WS; only undefeated guy when you remove the top three compared to the rest of the group and also has the fourth best coaches rank at the weight.
5-11 seeds create a big muddled group with losses and split among each other. Nobody has a win above this group and nobody has a loss below this group.
5. G. Rooks (Ind) (13-6, 6-4 Big Ten Starters): 14 CR, 20 RPI, 32 WS; Rooks is 5-2 in this group of seven and only Martin (3-2 in group) has a winning record in group. He also has the highest coaches rank and split his matches with Martin. Making this a little easier is the 12-3 loss came to Martin at the Midlands. He avenged that loss in the dual which might give it more weight. I think this is right but that was a very decisive loss in splitting the five and six seeds. Also has a loss to Angelo
6. Martin (Wis) (13-8, 4-6 Big Ten Starters): 17 CR, 22 RPI, 25 WS; mentioned the split with Rooks and has pinned Purinton and beaten Parriot while not getting to see Thomas who is the only other remaining guy vying for this seed in the top 20 of the coaches rank. His only loss below this is Verkleeren (3-1 match) which shows what he is capable of.
7. Purinton (Neb) (13-8, 4-6 Big Ten Starters): 16 CR, 10 RPI, 23 WS; this is probably between Purinton and Thomas. Purinton only loss to somebody below him came to Parriott at Cliff Keen (7-3) but he avenged that defeat with a 13-6 win in the dual.
8. Thomas (NW) (12-5, 4-2 Big Ten Starters): 18 CR, 18 RPI, 28 WS; if the five-seven seeds go as I think, that leaves Thomas, Parriott, Verkleeran, and Angelo as for eight through 11 and the only match that occurred between them was a 10-3 win for Thomas over Parriott. Thomas also has the highest remaining coaches rank so I will put him here.
9. Parriott (Pur) (14-8, 2-6 Big Ten Starters): 20 CR, 19 RPI, 42 WS; it is razor thin between Parriott and Verkleeren for the nine seed. Both beat Jodeh by 6-2 and 5-2 scores, both lost to Lee by identical 7-5 scores in OT, Verkleeran lost in OT to Sasso who pinned Parriott, Purinton pinned Verkleeren and split with Parriott, while Verkleeran beat Martin and Parriott lost that match. I will go with the slight edge to Parriott in the coaches rank but give Verkleeran the 10.
10. Verkleeren (PSU) (14-6, 3-4 Big Ten Starters): 22 CR, 33 RPI, 36 WS; hopefully the nine explaination makes sense.
11. Angelo (Rut) (14-10, 2-3 Big Ten Starters): 45 WS; has some wins above him but just not enough and is the only one without a coaches ranking. Probably didn’t help that he seemed to be splitting duals.
12. Hrisopoulos (MSU) (12-13, 1-6 Big Ten Starters): 50 WS; final three seeds head-to-head match wrestlestat rankings Hrisopoulos beat Jodeh 4-0 and did not wresle Garlitz who might not even be the Maryland starter. He also beat Doetsch by a 6-1 score in the dual if that is the Terrapins rep.
13. Jodeh (Ill) (3-14, 1-7 Big Ten Starters): 73 WS; only win against conference starters was a 10-1 win over Garlitz
14. Garlitz (Md) (2-7, 0-4 Big Ten Starters): 77 WS; has not really been competitive with starting DI wrestlers but a new season begins shortly. If Doetsch gets the call he is 9-12 but has not wrestled since Jan. 26. He is 0-5 against who I project as Big 10 starters and would also be the likely 14.

157 lbs.
1. Deakin (NW) (17-0, 6-0 Big Ten Starters):
1 CR, 1 RPI, 2 WS; two guys undefeated in conference who did not face each other. Deakin has been a little more dominant overall against the common opponents and also has the top coaches rank.
2. Young (Iowa) (15-2, 9-0 Big Ten Starters): 4 CR, 4 RPI, 3 WS; Young is also undefeated in conference and has the second highest coaches rank in the conference. He has more Big 10 starter wins but that is mainly due to who teams have sent out against Deakin if memory serves me correctly. Young also hit some guys twice at the Midlands and dual.
3. Coleman (Pur) (26-7, 6-3 Big Ten Starters): 7 CR, 6 RPI, 13 WS; take away Deakin and and Young and the third highest coaches rank is undefeated against everybody underneath him as two of his losses came to Young.
4. Lewan (Mich) (17-5, 8-3 Big Ten Starters): 9 CR, 8 RPI, 12 WS; the pattern continues as the top seeds get removed as Lewan is undefeated against everybody below him on the year.
5. Thomas (Minn) (11-7, 2-3 Big Ten Starters): 30 CR, 28 WS; the pattern breaks a little as Thomas is undefeated with Lewan out of the equation but is not next in the coaches ranking. However, he did beat Tucker who beat Robb who has the next highest coaches rank so we will use the transitive property even if that may not come to fruition in the actual tournament when he hits those guys.
6. Tucker (MSU) (24-7, 4-4 Big Ten Starters): 21 CR, 14 RPI, 17 WS; Tucker is undefeated against the remainder of the field and has a 7-5 win over Robb to take the six seed
7. Robb (Neb) (16-5, 2-3 Big Ten Starters): 15 CR, 13 RPI, 15 WS; the fifth highest coaches ranking on the board slides to seven with head-to-heads. His wins in conference came against Silva and Kinner but have a 14 spot gap from the remainder of the field in the coaches rank is hard to ignore.
8. Kinner (OSU) (20-6, 1-1 Big Ten Starters): 21 WS; Is this the guy after traveling between 133 and 157? I would think Ohio State would wrestle their postseason guy in the last dual of the year and he beat Berge. I originally had him listed as 10 my first run through and then realized that Cleary had beaten Barone before I guess Kinner beat him out for the spot? I was hesitant to pull the trigger on him too early due to his variety of weights but realized he could qualify a spot if he gets a coaches rank (I believe Cleary was right around 30 which makes me wonder why they included him if Kinner really is the guy. However, Kinner is 11-1 in Division I matches at 157 so if he gets the coaches rank that is a spot for the Big 10. I can see the argument for him at 10 but no lower which is where I had him originally.
9. Barone (Ill) (11-11, 4-4 Big Ten Starters): 40 WS; I feel like this guy was in the top 10 last year but has wins over everybody below him to get this spot. His results haven’t shown it but I am just waiting for this guy to break out. He beat Jones 4-3 who is the last guy on the board with a coaches ranking. He could move up to eight ahead of Kinner.
10. Jones (Md) (12-6, 2-2 Big Ten Starters): 29 CR, 39 WS; Take the guy who could very qualify a spot for the conference off the board (if he can get the matches). Has no losses after Barone. Wins are against Silva and Van Brill.
11-14 seed get interesting as it is guys late to the lineup and the only result among them is a 3-0 win for Van Brill over Silva.
11. Van Brill (Rut) (16-15, 1-6 Big Ten Starters): 45 WS; this could be Berge but I just don’t think they will give it to him with lack of matches. Despite his conference record, he does have a winning over record.
12. Berge (PSU) (1-1, 0-1 Big Ten Starters): 10 WS; I think he could be 14 but I don’t know how you do that to the three seed. I also don’t know how you seed him ahead of two guys who wrestled all year but I have settled him here.
13. Model (Wis) (7-12, 0-4 Big Ten Starters): 50 WS; lost close to Baron and Lewan, never majored but more substantial losses to Young and Tucker. Has been splitting time in the lineup is the reason for limited duals but he wrestled today so I am giving him to starting nod.
14. Silva (Ind) (8-18, 0-11 Big Ten Starters): 57 WS; I feel like all this guy does is lose close matches. I am pretty confident he will be 13th or 14th depending on Berge. If 14, he lost 8-6 in OT to Coleman who would be his likely first round matchup. Lewan beat him 2-1 and 6-5 and he would be the matchup if Silva moves up to the 13th seed. Lost 9-7 to Thomas, 3-2 to Jones, lost 6-5 to Pipher. Deakin and Young handled him. Everybody else should be on upset alert.

165 lbs.
1. Joseph (PSU) (12-0, 8-0 Big Ten Starters):
1 CR, 1 WS; pretty cool that we got to see him wrestle each of the other probably semifinalists throughout the year. Here is hoping the results go the same way for Joseph if they all meet again.
2. Marinelli (Iowa) (16-1, 4-1 Big Ten Starters): 2 CR, 3 RPI, 2 WS; 4-2 and 4-3 wins over Wick and White along with the 7-5 defeat against Joseph in his first-ever dual loss.
3. Wick (Wis) (22-3, 7-2 Big Ten Starters): 3 CR, 5 RPI, 3 WS; beat White 10-6. I know I say this a lot but it is great that the top 3 guys in the country (arguably four but coaches rank says otherwise) all see each other throughout the year just in conference (for the fans, maybe not their win loss records).
4. White (Neb) (15-3, 5-3 Big Ten Starters): 5 CR, 4 RPI, 6 WS; Heavy hitters better be ready to roll when the semis come around.
5. Smith (OSU) (15-11, 6-6 Big Ten Starters): 12 CR, 11 RPI, 17 WS; this could be an interesting test case of how heavy they value Big 10 duals as opposed to tournament matches. Smith lost to Oster 10-9 in the dual meet, but does 12-6 and 5-4 wins over Oster to make him 2-1 on the year from meeting twice at the Cliff Keen. Smith also has a 3-1 win over Braunagel.
6. Oster (NW) (16-7, 6-4 Big Ten Starters): 18 CR, 23 RPI, 23 WS; another interesting tournament vs. dual situation as Oster won the dual by a 6-5 score. Braunagel won in a tournament by a more convincing 10-6 score. Braunagel also has the higher coaches rank. The dual between those two happened on February 2 so that was on paper when the coaches rank took place.
7. D. Braunagel (Ill) (19-6, 4-3 Big Ten Starters): 13 CR, 15 RPI, 19 WS; no losses below him and does have the split with Oster that could bump him up to six but the loss to Smith blocks him from going higher.
8. Hughes (MSU) (14-9, 5-3 Big Ten Starters): 29 CR, 29 WS; stalled out against Oster to prevent him from possibly the six seed but he did lose to Braunagel 9-2. Has no wins above and beaten everybody below, including a 5-2 win against O’Reilly who he is right next to in coaches ranking (and my seeds).
9. O'Reilly (Minn) (20-8, 3-5 Big Ten Starters): 28 CR, 17 RPI, 26 WS; has beaten three of five below him but the two he did not face are Cochran and Donner who are the highest rated. However, he should hold as he beat Meisinger 17-8 who both of those guys lost to.
10. Meisinger (Mich) (6-9, 2-3 Big Ten Starters): 45 WS; just mentioned him as now he comes off the board with his 12-9 and 7-3 wins against Cochran and Donner. All losses to higher seeds.
11. Cochran (Md) (12-8, 3-5 Big Ten Starters): 33 WS; Has no wins higher but has beaten all three of the guys below him, including as he did not allow a point to any of them, winning 4-0 vs. Donner, 12-0 vs. Hoey, and 11-0 vs. Webster.
12. Donner (Rut) (16-13, 0-8 Big Ten Starters): 33 CR, 39 WS; no conference wins but did not face either of the guys below him. Plus he has a coaches ranking so it is surprising to see him this low but I can’t put him any higher. This is a weight however where 12 allocations is not out of the question. Don’t think it happens however. Maybe 12 guys from the conference at nationals after at-larges?
13. Webster (Pur) (3-12, 1-7 Big Ten Starters): 75 WS; beat Hoey 6-4 when they wrestling for only conference win against starters.
14. Hoey (Ind) (6-11, 0-4 Big Ten Starters): 76 WS; only recently broke into lineup; was majored by Cochran (12-0) and pinned by O’Reilly to give some context on the gap he will have to close.

174 lbs.
1. Kemmerer (Iowa) (12-0, 8-0 Big Ten Starters):
1 CR, 2 WS; beat Hall in what we hopefully will get to see two more times. Although Kemmerer making the finals probably doesn’t bode well for Penn State at nationals if they want to win.
2. Hall (PSU) (20-1, 9-1 Big Ten Starters): 2 CR, 2 RPI, 1 WS; outside of Kemmerer, didn’t get to wrestle Lydy but pinned Labriola in a marquee match for him during regular season
3. Lydy (Pur) (28-1, 8-1 Big Ten Starters): 4 CR, 3 RPI, 5 WS; Lydy looks on a mission this year and I am looking forward to a potential semifinal although I favor hall. His only loss all year was an 8-4 decision against Kemmerer.
4. Labriola (Neb) (17-6, 5-4 Big Ten Starters): 6 CR, 5 RPI, 6 WS; lost twice to Lydy and only 4-3 vs. Kemmerer making 174 a potentially overlooked pair of semifinals if each of the seeds hold to that point. 5. Romero (OSU) (15-5, 5-5 Big Ten Starters): 7 CR, 6 RPI, 10 WS; Romero beat Skatzka 2-1 in the dual and has a one spot higher coaches ranking after avenging a 1-0 loss during the Cliff Keen Invitational. Labriola owns 3-1 and 2-1 wins this year heading into probable quarterfinal.
6. Skatzka (Minn) (24-8, 4-5 Big Ten Starters): 8 CR, 18 RPI, 8 WS; despite losing record he has no losses below and does have the split with Romero. Lost 14-4 against Lydy when the met in regular season in probable quarterfinal matchup.
Seeds 7-10, possibly down to 13 interesting as Morland beat Gunther who beat both Malczewski and Cavaciu. Morland inj. Def. to Malczeswski 30 seconds and after opponent initial takedown to muddy waters. Lots of injury to this group of guys and no Intel to know if they are going or not.
7. Gunther (Ill) (14-6, 4-4 Big Ten Starters): 19 CR, 12 RPI, 20 WS; dilemma here as Gunter lost to Morland and has beaten everybody else below him and has no ranked wins above. However, Morland injury defaulted against Malczweski for Morland’s only loss below the top six. Morland would be the easy #7 if he had won against Malczewski but I think the missed time and the coaches ranking hurt his resume. Further complicating this is that Gunter has the highest coaches rank of the remaining wrestlers to be seeded. He is either seven or eight.
8. Covaciu (Ind) (14-9, 1-6 Big Ten Starters): 25 CR, 28 RPI, 33 WS; add another variable to the equation. Cavaciu lost to Gunther twice but beat Malczewski by a 7-5 score. He has not wrestled since his injury defaulted right before the overtime against Spadafora of Maryland on January 26. He officially lost that that match to Spadafora but was winning at the time. He could fall to nine if they put Morland above Gunter but can’t seem him going lower despite “loss” to Spadafora. Injury doesn’t look bad on video but there is a chance he may not be able to go.
9. Malczewski (MSU) (21-11, 3-5 Big Ten Starters): 23 CR, 19 RPI, 25 WS; lost to Gunter and was winning 2-0 before the injury default victory against Morland. Could fall to nine if the coaches don’t fell the sample size of the match versus Morland is fair. However, Malczweski has the higher coaches rank when comparing resume to Morland. This is proabably best case scenario for him. Worst would only be tenth though.
10. Morland (NW) (9-7, 2-3 Big Ten Starters): 28 CR, 22 RPI, 29 WS; hasn’t hit Cavaciu, Malczweski or Grello during regular season but does have a 2-0 win over Gunther who is highest remaining in coaches rank and undefeated below him. However, he has missed ever dual since injury defaulting to Malczewski just 30 seconds in after getting taken down. I could see him at seven but gave nod to others on coaches rank. He is anywhere from 7-10. I think this would be worst case scenario for him although I can’t see him getting past Hall or Kemmerer regardless of seed in that range. Is he healthy?
11. Grello (Rut) (6-5, 1-3 Big Ten Starters): 28 CR, 26 WS; another guy who has missed time with injury and hasn’t wrestled since default to Hall on January 19. Goodale says he will be back. Does own a 3-2 win over Spadafora for me to give him the nod here.
12. Spadafora (Md) (15-12, 2-6 Big Ten Starters): 31 CR, 27 RPI, 42 WS; no wins above outside of the injury default win against Cavaciu. Has beaten Maylor twice and Dow just recently descended to 174. Twelve guys at this weight ranked by the coaches is a ton and this group my have to suck it up since the allocation will probably fall right around 10 to my best guess.
13. Dow (Wis) (8-9, 1-0 Big Ten Starters): 47 WS; was down at 174, went up to 184, and now is back to 174 for the final conference dual of the year. Not sure he is even the starter but I know Wisconsin is looking for answers at the weight. Krattinger has seen the most time at this weight but got pinned the last two duals. If he does come back, he has a win against Morland and a loss to Gunther just in case the waters weren’t muddy enough at this weight after six. Dow won 4-3 against Maylor to get my nod for 13 if he is the guy.
14. Maylor (Mich) (3-14, 0-10 Big Ten Starters): 65 WS; time to let it rip in the postseason.

184 lbs.
Oh boy! The only thing I have as certain at first look is Hinz at 13 and Jasenski 14. Brooks lost to Venz who lost to Jordan who lost to Janzer who got majored by Jessen. Let’s try to break it down.
1. Brooks (PSU) (11-1, 6-1 Big Ten Starters): 6 CR, 6 WS; I think the one seed comes down to Caffey and Brooks as both are 6-1 in Big 10 conference duals vs. Starters in top 12. Brooks has the loss to Venz 9-5 who Caffey beat 11-6, but Caffey has a loss to Janzer (6-4) who Brooks pinned. However, I think the difference comes down to Caffey took losses to Branaugel (avenged in dual) and Embree (rideout) but beat Janzer to 1-2 in tournaments. I am not completely convinced it won’t be Caffey but the sixth coaches rank for Brooks is slightly better than seven for Caffey. However, Brooks does not have an RPI do to matches and so I don’t know if that will hurt him. The loss to Venz is probably also a “better” loss than to Janzer for what it is worth.
2. Caffey (MSU) (24-6, 8-3 Big Ten Starters): 7 CR, 14 RPI, 9 WS; only other guy in the weight in the top 10 of coaches rank at weight in conference and could easily slide up to one. I don’t want to say nothing is possible in the top 12 seeds but I feel Brooks and Caffey are one and two in some order.
3. Assad (Iowa) (19-5, 6-2 Big Ten Starters): 11 CR, 5 RPI, 10 WS; if you assume Brooks and Caffey are 1-2, those are the only losses Assad has and so he is the logical three seed. It is matches the coaches ranking as he was 11 and the only guy who was higher in the last release was Venz at 10 and Assad beat him in the dual.
4. Venz (Neb) (15-7, 5-3 Big Ten Starters): 10 CR, 4 RPI, 7 WS; both Janzer, Venz, and Sebastian have one overall loss to the Big 10 starter outside of the top three, you can add it Webster who only has one loss in duals outside of those three. However, Venz’s only remaining loss is 3-2 against Jordan. He is also the highest coaches ranking on the board and so I think this is his spot.
5. Janzer (Rut) (19-6, 7-3 Big Ten Starters): 19 CR, 17 RPI, 27 WS; his seems high for Janzer based off of his coaches rank but he is 4-1 against my five through 12 seeds with the only loss being in rideout to Braunagel. He also beat Jordan by a 5-4 score in the dual. That being said, it wouldn’t surprise me if he moved.
6. Webster (Minn) (19-8, 4-4 Big Ten Starters): 21 CR, 21 RPI, 24 WS; another one where the head-to-head doesn’t match the overall resume based on the coaches ranking. Webster, Jordan and Sebastian all have 1 conference loss in duals left with Jordan and Sebastian having that as their only conference loss remaining. However, both of Webster’s losses came to Embree and his dual loss was in OT. He also handed Jordan (5-4) and Sebastian (3-1) their remaining losses so I go with him here.
7. Jordan (OSU) (27-7, 5-4 Big Ten Starters): 17 CR, 11 RPI, 13 WS; Sebastian and Jordan are the lone remaining unbeaten wrestlers I have in seeds 7-12. They also have wrestled different schedules with Webster and Brooks both beating them. Webster by the 5-4 and 3-1 scores while Brooks beat Jordan 15-4 and Sebastian 3-2. I am going to put them back-to-back and defer to the coaches rank and their overall record to split the difference. Braunagel also also still hanging out at this point with the twelfth coaches rank which is the fourth best among his peers.
8. Sebastian (Wis) (10-5, 3-3 Big Ten Starters): 22 CR, 18 WS; been talking about him long enough. Time to seed him even though I don’t love putting him ahead of Braunagel. If he is here, interesting that he lost 3-2 and would be a possible matchup for Brooks in quarters (assuming Brooks is top seed).
9. Z. Braunagel (Ill) (17-8, 6-5 Big Ten Starters): 12 CR, 9 RPI, 25 WS; the 9-12 seeds that I have all wrestled each other throughout the year and Braunagel and Lyon are both 2-1 in those remaining common opponents. Lyon has the head-to-head against Braunagel (5-2 win). However, the coaches rank is a little too much for me to keep ignoring and I feel Braunagel might go higher. Even as high as fifth seed. Lyon’s overall losing record against the Big 10 also plays in here for me.
10. Embree (Mich) (15-10, 8-5 Big Ten Starters): 20 CR, 22 RPI, 30 WS; the Big 10 record here says he should go higher but two of those wins are double victories over the same opponent he hit in a dual and tournament (Jasenski and Webster). He is also a win against Jessen but the lost the dual meet when they met which hampered him in my eyes. He also beat Lyon who is the only remaining guy with a coaches rank by 5-4 score so I don’t see him any lower than 10 in any scenario.
11. Lyon (Pur) (16-12, 4-7 Big Ten Starters): 33 CR, 28 RPI, 35 WS; overall body of work and having a coaches rank puts Lyon in this spot (which matches his coaches rank order in the conference). He defeated Jessen and also a win against Braunagel. Wins against Jasenski (12-4) and Hinz (7-2) buff up his record but did not really help his seed.
12. Jessen (NW) (14-14, 2-7 Big Ten Starters): 27 RPI, 40 WS; a split against Embree got him in the discussion but just not enough other quality results justify him any higher and I feel pretty good about this seed. He also is the only one in the top 12 group without a coaches ranking.
13. Hinz (Ind) (7-18, 1-10 Big Ten Starters): 70 WS; won 7-2 when these two met for his only win against conference starters.
14. Jasenski (Md) (9-15, 0-8 Big Ten Starters): 60 WS; losses by 7-2 scores against Janzer and Lyon are his best conference results of the year but there is still time to improve as 184 could be a landmine blown up bracket. However, not sure that matters as the top 12 are all very good.

197 lbs.
1. Moore (OSU) (24-0, 8-0 Big Ten Starters):
1 CR, 1 RPI, 1 WS; top guy and undefeated across entire country. Did not see Warner, but pounded Brunner (16-6) and handled Schultz (6-2) by look of score. High scoring 14-9 win against Davison.
2. Schultz (Neb) (20-3, 7-1 Big Ten Starters): 7 CR, 6 RPI, 8 WS; only conference loss is to Moore. Beat Warner 3-1 but did not see Brunner who was injured during the dual (beat backup 15-6). His coaches ranking is also right in line with those two wrestlers.
3. Warner (Iowa) (14-3, 7-1 Big Ten Starters): 5 CR, 3 RPI, 6 WS; undefeated after losses to top two and beat Brunner by an 8-2 score. Did not see Davison who is only other top coaches rank guy at the weight.
4. Brunner (Pur) (22-5, 4-3 Big Ten Starters): 6 CR, 4 RPI, 15 WS; lost to Davison in overtime during the dual for a loss below him but did beat him twice at the Midlands. Has not wrestled since injury defaulting to Pagano on January 26.
5. Davison (NW) (13-6, 7-4 Big Ten Starters): 10 CR, 16 RPI, 7 WS; could move up to four seed based on dual win against Brunner and that Brunner has missed time. However, Davison was also pinned against Smith in the last conference dual of the year against Maryland which is a bad loss that I don’t see huring him lower than this but just couldn’t move him up to four with that on record.
6. Rasheed (PSU) (4-4, 3-4 Big Ten Starters): 25 CR, 5 WS; only remaining undefeated conference guy of the remaining to be seeded. Only Pagano has the higher coaches ranking but he beat him 6-0 in the dual. Did not see Striggow or Ritter who are also in coaches ranking but below him in my seeds.
7. Pagano (Rut) (21-7, 4-5 Big Ten Starters): 18 CR, 12 RPI, 16 WS; only loss to seeds below him is Smith who he was also pinned by. He does have the highest coaches rank and a 6-5 win against Striggow but did not face Ritter who are the other two in coaches ranking.
8. J. Striggow (Mich) (16-8, 7-5 Big Ten Starters): 33 CR, 23 RPI, 25 WS; both he and Ritter have coaches ranking and will likely fall into the 8-9 quarterfinal. Striggow has a 6-4 win against Ritter but took a 5-2 defeat at the hands of May who will end up below him. All other losses are to higher seeds.
9. Ritter (Minn) (19-7, 3-3 Big Ten Starters): 27 CR, 26 WS; putting Striggow eighth makes Ritter undefeated against each of the bottom six seeds with wins against three of them. He is also the last guy on the board with a coaches ranking.
10-12 were 1-1 against each other
10. Smith (Md) (10-7, 4-3 Big Ten Starters): 40 WS; lost 4-0 to May but beat Wrobleski 6-5. I put him here because of the overall record he has plus pins against Davison and Pagano. If the seeds do fall this way he would hit Pagano in the first round with a pin against a guy he would be the underdog against by seed.
11. May (MSU) (12-17, 3-6 Big Ten Starters): 50 WS; lost to Wrobleski in overtime but the win against Striggow and overall better record makes me lean towards May. If it comes to Rasheed’s opponent (which would be eleven if he is six), Rasheed did not wrestle May but beat Wrobleski 3-0 in that match that was his first dual back and looked like it could have gone either way at the end of regulation.
12. Wrobleski (Ill) (9-13, 3-9 Big Ten Starters): 30 RPI, 53 WS; has an RPI which could bump him up to his as high as tenth. Has two wins over Willham and an overtime win against May.
13. Watkins (Wis) (6-15, 1-6 Big Ten Starters): 59 WS; only conference win was a 6-1 victory over starters was a 6-1 win over Watkins.
Willham (Ind) (16-17, 0-11 Big Ten Starters): 60 WS; stronger record than some above him but no conference wins to date to show for it.

285 lbs.
1. G. Steveson (Minn) (11-0, 5-0 Big Ten Starters):
1 CR, 1 WS; is not the popular pick but is the number one guy in the rankings right now. Only two common opponents with Parris and they are top guys. He beat Cassioppi 7-5 while Parris pinned him. Steveson beat Hillger 10-5 and Parris won 3-1 against Hillger. That being said, I am looking forward to the anticipated final.
2. Parris (Mich) (25-0, 8-0 Big Ten Starters): 2 CR, 1 RPI, 2 WS; every time I see him dominate I think of Cassar driving him from one of the mat to the other last year and makes me wonder what could have been for this year. To his credit, looks like he has gotten better.
3. Cassioppi (Iowa) (15-2, 7-2 Big Ten Starters): 3 CR, 2 RPI, 4 WS; only losses are to the top two and he has beaten the next five guys in the coaches ranking, including a 3-2 win against Hillger.
4. Hillger (Wis) (19-4, 7-3 Big Ten Starters): 5 CR, 5 RPI, 5 WS; possible fifth seed at nationals but only a four in the Big 10. Nevills was the only guy in the coaches ranking that he did not see. Wins below, losses above his seed.
5. Traub (OSU) (20-6, 4-3 Big Ten Starters): 24 CR, 16 RPI, 32 WS; I think this was Nevills’ seed right up until the loss to Traub. There is almost a 10 spot difference in the coaches ranking and Traub should move up as I believe that is his signature win.
6. Nevills (PSU) (12-3, 5-3 Big Ten Starters): 16 CR, 20 WS; the 4-0 win against Lance vaults him to sixth as they were tied in the coaches rank this past release. Sets up a quarterfinal matchup with Cassioppi.
7. Lance (Neb) (10-6, 1-4 Big Ten Starters): 16 CR, 23 WS; highest remaining coaches ranked guy on the board. Interesting that he does not have a conference win against any of the top guys as his only victory is against Kleimola among the Big 10 starters. He did major Kleimola who Penola beat 6-1.
8. Penola (Pur) (19-12, 4-4 Big Ten Starters): 25 CR, 17 RPI, 24 WS; both he and Luffman on the board with coaches rankings yet and he owns a 5-3 win against Luffman to give him the edge.
9. Luffman (Ill) (15-7, 4-5 Big Ten Starters): 30 CR, 30 RPI, 29 WS; has wins against everybody in bottom five except for Kleimola who he did not wrestle and that is probably who the seed comes down to. Only common win he beat Heyob 14-4 and Kleimola won 3-1. That and the coaches ranking give him this seed. Huge gap between top nine and bottom five in wrestlestat rankings. Beat Esposito 11-3 in the dual to show difference.
10. Esposito (Rut) (17-12, 2-3 Big Ten Starters): 45 WS; winning record filling in for Collucci who is done for the year. Beat Rebottaro 5-2 who is the only other guy in the bottom five with a winning record.
11. Rebottaro (MSU) (16-13, 2-6 Big Ten Starters): 47 WS; Nevills’ first opponent comes down to Rebottaro or Kleimola and Nevills did not see either one in regular season. Both have wins over Heyob 6-4 for Rebottaro and 3-1 for Kleimola. Giving the edge to Rebottaro for the overall winning record.
12. Kleimola (Ind) (10-14, 1-3 Big Ten Starters): 63 WS; defeated Heyob 3-1 to finally get his seed after being talked about for a while.
13. Heyob (NW) (1-13, 1-8 Big Ten Starters): 83 WS; only win of the year so far was a 9-0 victory over Robinson.
14. Robinson (Md) (1-20, 0-7 Big Ten Starters): 78 WS; only win came against VMI backup.
 

regularfan

Well-Known Member
Jan 22, 2019
453
697
1
If this seeds all held, here would be the team scores:

Team scores (placers in top 8)
1. Iowa – 142 (10)
2. Penn State – 104 (7)
3. Ohio State - 90.5 (8)
4. Nebraska - 86 (9)
5. Minnesota - 78.5 (7)
6. Wisconsin - 68.5 (6)
7. Northwestern - 59 (6)
8. Purdue - 58 (5)
9. Michigan - 57.5 (6)
10. Illinois - 41.5 (5)
11. Michigan State - 31 (3)
12. Rutgers - 27.5 (4)
13. Indiana - 24 (4)
14. Maryland- 2 (0)
 

regularfan

Well-Known Member
Jan 22, 2019
453
697
1
Here is the breakdown of seeds by team that I have if anybody is interested in just that.

Seeds by Team

Illinois
125: Cardini – 4
133: Piotrowski – 4
141: Duncan – 7
149: Jodeh - 13
157: Barone – 9
165: D. Braunagel – 7
174: Gunther – 7
184: Z. Braunagel – 9
197: Wrobleski – 12
285: Luffman - 9

Indiana
125: Cronin – 7
133: C. Rooks – 8
141: Bolivar – 13
149: G. Rooks – 5
157: Silva – 14
165: Hoey – 14
174: Covaciu – 8
184: Hinz – 13
197: Willham – 14
285: Kleimola – 12

Iowa
125: Lee – 1
133: DeSanto – 3
141: Murin – 5
149: Lugo – 2
157: Young – 2
165: Marinelli – 2
174: Kemmerer – 1
184: Assad – 3
197: Warner – 3
285: Cassioppi – 3

Maryland
125: Cray – 13
133: Sandoval – 13
141: Baxter – 14
149: Garlitz – 14
157: Jones – 10
165: Cochran – 11
174: Spadafora – 12
184: Jasenski – 14
197: Smith – 10
285: Robinson – 14

Michigan
125: Medley – 5
133: Assad – 12
141: C. Mattin – 8
149: Storr – 4
157: Lewan – 4
165: Meisinger – 10
174: Maylor – 14
184: Embree – 10
197: J. Striggow – 8
285: Parris – 2

Michigan State
125: Griffith – 12
133: Pepple – 9
141: Santos – 12
149: Hrisopoulos – 12
157: Tucker – 6
165: Hughes – 8
174: Malczewski – 9
184: Caffey – 2
197: May – 11
285: Rebottaro – 11

Minnesota
125: P. McKee – 3
133: Dryden – 10
141: M. McKee – 6
149: Lee – 3
157: Thomas – 5
165: O'Reilly – 9
174: Skatzka – 6
184: Webster – 6
197: Ritter – 9
285: G. Steveson – 1

Nebraska
125: Thomsen – 10
133: Lovett – 6
141: Red – 4
149: Purinton- 7
157: Robb – 7
165: White – 4
174: Labriola – 4
184: Venz – 4
197: Schultz – 2
285: Lance – 7

Northwestern
125: DeAugustino – 6
133: Rivera – 5
141: McKenna – 9
149: Thomas – 8
157: Deakin – 1
165: Oster – 6
174: Morland – 10
184: Jessen – 12
197: Davison – 5
285: Heyob - 13

Ohio State
125: Heinselman – 11
133: Decatur – 14
141: Pletcher – 2
149: Sasso – 1
157: Kinner – 8
165: Smith – 5
174: Romero – 5
184: Jordan – 7
197: Moore – 1
285: Traub – 5

Penn State
125: Meredith – 14
133: Bravo-Young – 2
141: Lee – 1
149: Verkleeren – 10
157: Berge – 12
165: Joseph – 1
174: Hall – 2
184: Brooks – 1
197: Rasheed – 6
285: Nevills – 6

Purdue
125: Schroder – 2
133: Ford-Melton – 11
141: Filius – 10
149: Parriott – 9
157: Coleman – 3
165: Webster – 13
174: Lydy – 3
184: Lyon – 11
197: Brunner – 4
285: Penola – 8

Rutgers
125: Aguilar – 8
133: Alvarez – 7
141: Aragona – 11
149: Angelo – 11
157: Van Brill – 11
165: Donner – 12
174: Grello – 11
184: Janzer – 5
197: Pagano – 7
285: Esposito – 10

Wisconsin
125: Barnett – 9
133: Gross – 1
141: Moran – 3
149: Martin – 6
157: Model – 13
165: Wick – 3
174: Dow – 13
184: Sebastian – 8
197: Watkins – 13
285: Hillger – 4
 

Latest posts