ObserverW

I must apologize, I was confused. I thought this was a discussion board, turns out many of you guys would rather it be an agreement board. Its hard for me to believe some of you guys are even involved in wrestling. It seems like your feelings are hurt much too easily. I've already voiced my opinion on where several of the teams should or should not be ranked. Do you really want me to put out a full list? Imagine how many more feelings will be hurt!

Wow ArtusCimber, I had to look that word up. Now I'm hurt. What did I say that hurt your feelings? I haven't said anything about your Jefferson County or Science Hill teams yet.

Ok, listen I'm not saying Cleveland isn't/wasn't good last year. They might have very well been one of the top 4 or 5 teams if they were in another region and had the opportunity to go last season. The statement "earn your ranking" was posed and that's where the discussion about Cleveland started. I'm a huge Cleveland supporter, they are a top notch team, but last year they did not "earn" a top 3 dual team ranking. Mr. Price also pointed out that individual tournament results did not equal dual strength. So we can't really extrapolate their top 4 individual tourny place to a top 4 dual placement. Facts are facts, if you don't get a ticket to the ball, you cannot be named King or Queen. Last year, Cleveland didn't have a dual tourny ticket. So, cbwrestler, I would advise you to stop. I really hope Cleveland gets their chance to attend the ball this season. For the record I have not complained about Clevelands ranking in the poll. I'm not really sure how the convo got steered into a Cleveland discussion. My original point is the poll needs to be dissected and discussed. Clevelands placement this season is, in my opinion, accurate.

Not only do I believe it, it is fact. The Kansas City Chiefs don't get to claim that they were the 2nd best team in the NFL last year, it was just unlucky that they happened to be in the same division as Denver. That's not the way it works. No matter how many people wanted KC or Cleveland to be there, the fact is, they didn't make it. They should not be ranked there, maybe its not fair but such is life.

Legacy team. Paper champion with no hardware.

I appreciate the fact that you expect your teams to earn their way into the rankings but since you mentioned last year, I must also discuss. Voting on "legacy" teams is real. Lets take last years coaches poll, following state duals they had Cleveland listed 3rd in AAA! Yes that's right, Cleveland, a team that didn't even qualify for State Duals. So unfortunately I must again say, your poll lacks in validity. You can surmise all you want but Cleveland DID NOT earn that ranking! Are these the same people still being polled? Maybe you should suggest everyone in your poll group should have similar standards as your own.

I'm not lobbying for Arlington, I'm only using them as an example. Truth be told, I'd say Arlington would prefer to go unmentioned. But to your point, doing "homework" would require a little more than looking at the scoreboard and saying Team A beat Team B. You must consider other factors, as you also stated in your last comment. This is not about predicting who will win matches in the 1st week of the season, its predicting where teams will finish. To many, early season dual scores are irrelevant, other than a little pride, especially with non-district, nothing is really lost. So, are YOU suggesting that NW and Bartlett should be included in the rankings ahead of Arlington based on a week one match?

Which teams will be at Cleveland Duals?

Well I didn't even have to say it again, you said it for me! A "bunch of silly wild arsed guesses" So why would you not want to put some coaches in the poll that have studied the situation enough to at least make Educated Guesses. There are coaches out there to have studied the situation and could make a much better attempt. Good point on returning placers not necessarily equaling a great dual team and using this logic, Arlington should be way up on your dual rankings list. They didn't have a lot of returning medalists, but they do have several kids that return that were several rounds deep. So I wouldn't say a team of superstars but a lot of solid talent on that team. All this information is readily available to the public AND the coaches in your poll. Lets help each other out here and expect a higher level of care when voting, maybe next time suggest your pollsters gather some pertinent information and THEN cast the vote. Lets give the wrestlers the respect they deserve by trying a little harder next time.

You are correct Sir, it is a poll. But one would assume that those being polled have a base of knowledge on which to cast their vote. It should not be a guessing exercise. By saying there is no homework proves the exact point I am making regarding legacy teams. If a pollster does not do his homework, he will simply vote based on what he has always voted. Thus, you get legacy teams in the poll that have no business being there. Just like Florida, Florida State, Notre Dame, University of Tennessee in football--they always end up highly ranked in the preseason football polls because of the "supposed to be there, legacy mentality." Never mind that any of those given teams finished the prior season with a 6-6 record, they will always be there.

All good points. Just curious why you feel that CBHS has to "earn their ranking" while some of the other legacy teams get an honorary ranking. Looking at past years polls this hasn't seemed to work out. So lets discuss! The poll is a great starting point for debate. I've made my, case and now that everyone has come to Mr. Price's rescue, lets talk about wrestling. Does anyone care to comment on my earlier points regarding placement within the poll?

Its a valid question and I assume from your replies that hes some sort of big wig in TN wrestling but I still stand by my previous statement, a pollster he is not and hes certainly not up to speed on the current state of wrestling in Tennessee. He may be a fine person and I mean no personal disrespect but if you are going to put out a poll, then you should do your homework. Just a few more bits of information to prove the lack of validity in this poll: Soddy Daisy returns one state champ and a fifth place medalist. So that slots them 12th with a power ranking just behind Christian Bros? Pigeon Forge returns four state placers and they not top 12.

I'm looking at this poll and trying to digest. I want to comment but not sure what really to say. A "shot in the dark" comes to mind. Who is Jeff Price and who are the other coaches that make up this poll? I thought Jeff Price was a middle school coach, but the description says a state-wide poll of "high school coaches." Just a few notes, Father Ryan beat Arlington by 9. Arlington was missing 3 wrestlers. Is FR way down this year or is Arlington up? Either way shouldn't they be closer in the poll? FR returns three champs, two 2nd, and seven overall medalists. Baylor returns two champs, three 3rd place medalists, and seven overall medalists. Does this warrant a #3 ranking? McCallie returns one champ, two 2nd, one 3rd, and six overall medalists. Is this really a 7th place team? Christian Bros returns one champ, three 2nd place, one 3rd place, three 4th place, and eleven overall medalists. And they're 11th?? How are the Bros behind McCallie and Baylor? Science Hill returns one 6th place wrestler. They are ranked ahead of Bros??? This is laughable. I realize this is supposed to be a poll of dual meet strength but total number of returning medalists should be a easy determination of overall dual meet strength and these numbers just don't compute. So again I must ask, who are the pollsters and on what basis are they making their rankings? Do they just take 12 teams and throw them into a hat and draw? The power rankings are absolute garbage. Someone please help me out here.

Another early upset as Phillips from Arlington drops a 7-4 decision to Cockman from Bartlett. Giving up 4 forfeits, Arlington loses 42-27. That makes 3 of the preseason top 10 teams to lose first week.

From the looks of a few early matches it appears there might be some shake up. Neither Gibbs or Indy looked like top 10 teams. Both had ranked wrestlers that lost to non-ranked opponents: Gibbs: Maxwell & Adzima both lost to Hardin Valley Indy: Schnedler lost to Mt. Juliet The Blue Raiders, on the other hand, rolled over NW Whitfield this morning. Some good performances and no surprises except a few Cleveland wrestlers not yet to their descents.

Seriously? Do we all have to agree??? Its called a "discussion board" In that case, please change your screen name, I don't want religion involved either. Sorry that I hurt your feelings but instead of trying to be my mother, go ahead and post about wrestling...

VERY good point Mrfixalot! But, in Mr. Hamm's defense, they did lose a lot of talent, I think all but maybe one place winner. On the other hand, if Science Hill can jump into the rankings at 7th with only one returning placer, then I think we should certainly discuss why SD is not considered. SH replaces Blackman with one returner and ahead of Indy & Gibbs with 2 returning placers. Just a bit curious to me that SH was not in the original 10 but after a slight edit, jumps to 7th. Is Hamm trying to give the East more love? Did Sommers have some influence, as we all know he always gives the token East Tennessee nod with SH. This just seems like some Hillary Clinton voting logic to me. But what do I know, I'm just an observer.

Will we get to see the McElhaney vs Landers matchup? From what I'm hearing, McElhaney will be at 138.

I'll go ahead and take a shot just to get the discussion started. These are in no particular order and are a best estimate at weight based on last year and current weights. 106 Dezember Lawrence Co Cannon Indy Horst Beech 113 Palmer Beech Hicks BC Wheaton SD 120 Dooley Franklin Sesnan WC Brothers Brentwood 126 Justice Halls Martin William Blount Burns Bearden 132 Landers Cleveland Brown Halls Shrader Franklin 138 McElhaney BC Ingram Indy Phillips Arlington 145 Fuller BC Pendley TN Wilkins Mt. Juliet 152 Matthews BC Whiteside Cleveland Henley TN 160 Rippy Beech Gregory Walker Valley Graham Rhea Co 170 Sells Blackman McMahan Halls Smith WC 182 Smith Beech Hicks Cleveland Satterfield William Blount 195 Fortner Gibbs Boeck SD Spangler TN 220 Carney NW Bednarski Ooltewah Demello Indy 285 Boykin Riverdale Kramer WC Champioon Tullahoma

Numbers don't lie that's why I like analyzing it this way. I know there is a tradition of success in the Maryville area and at Science Hill but tradition goes out the window many times due to graduation or the rise of other programs in the area. One such program on the rise is Independence--not sure if they are top 5 just yet but they are definitely moving in that direction. Unfortunately you do not see Heritage on the list because they scored zero points in the analysis, they are currently in rebuilding mode, might have a place winner this year but will be a few years until you see them competing at the level we are used to. Science Hill, while steeped rich in tradition of wining, has been down for the past few years. One place winner last year and only 2 others to come close. They have picked up some transfer talent from Single A North Carolina but I don't see it as enough to put them in the conversation for a top 5, they could conceivably slip back into a top 10 position with a good tournament. I think Halls gets the vote for dark horse. Never really any talk about them but they diligently go to work and get results. They have a shot at 2 finalists this season and at least 5 placers. Don't be surprised to see them knocking on the top 5 door. I'm still not sold on Wilson Central. I fail to see them making it over the top 5 hump. I see 3 placers with one finalist with Kramer. I'm not sold on Sesnan getting back to the finals. The end to his season last year leaves a bad taste in my mouth and if hes up in weight at all, I see him as a top 6. Until someone completes the task though, The Bears are still the team to beat and my pick to repeat.

TD2 - you say FR has only 3 studs returning and therefore drop their ranking. What do u see in Wilson Central that has you so optimistic? 2-WC returning medalist, no finalists and 1 transfer who was a finalist 2 years ago at 106. Where do the other points come from?

I’ve taken a look at last year’s state results to get a statistical look at what is returning this year and who might be the teams to beat. I only list teams from the Top 20 (if a team is not listed they had zero points). Each team has 3 numbers: First is the number of state place winners and wrestlers are listed with their place. Second is the number of state qualifiers who were one or two rounds from placing, on average wrestlers had to win at least 4 matches to get to this point, these wrestlers are listed with “2 rounds†beside their name. Third is the number of returning state qualifiers who won at least 2 matches but did not make it to the 5th consolation round with would put them in category 2, these wrestlers are listed with no notations. Teams are listed and ranked by total number of points in these three categories, when a tie exists weighing goes by order of criteria. This is a similar system used by some of the polls for NCAA. These numbers obviously do not include incoming freshman who can make a difference and should allow for some lively discussion. Bradley 4-1-2 Hicks -1 McElhaney-1 Fuller-1 Matthews-3 Headrick-2 rounds Ekins Gibson Cleveland 4-0-2 Pond-4 Whiteside-3 Landers-2 Hicks-5 Matthews Sweeney Tennessee 4-0-1 Nelson-3 Pendley-2 Henley-5 Spangler-4 Pendley Wilson 3*-2-0 Smith-5 Kramer-4 Pergande, A -2 rounds Noga-2 rounds *Sesnan-2 (’15*) Beech 3-1-1 Palmer-2 Rippy-1 Smith-6 Maddox-2 rounds Garrett Halls 3-0-2 Justice-3 Brown-4 McMahon-4 Neilson Harp Indy 2-2-1 Ingram-4 Demollo-4 Schooberl-2 rounds Schnedler-2 rounds Fowler Arlington 1-2-2 Cannon-6 Phillips-2 rounds Moore-2 rounds Morgan Metcalf Science Hill 1-1-2 James-6 Diehl-2 rounds Story Pridemore Blackman 1-1-1 Sells-1 Brown-2 rounds Fowler Siegel 0-2-1 Bradford-2 rounds Salter-2 rounds Moultry Gibbs 2-0-0 Adzima-6 Fortner-3 William Blount 2-0-0 Martin-2 Satterfield-6 Rossview 1-0-1 Gonzalez-5 Arias-lynch Ooltewah 1-0-0 Bednarski-3