State Individual seeding?

[ghouse]

Barrel,

 

I do not recall what weight Baucke certified at. If I had known any plans I likely wouldn't share because I do have a bit of an unfair line into that one program. There is often information I am aware of from multiple areas around the state I don't post because I don't like spreading rumors (no matter how likely they are). It doesn't matter as word will leak out from the seeding meeting to all interested parties soon enough.

 

Soms,

 

You are just evil sometimes.

 

To all,

Concerning state seeding I have a change in the verbiage for DI that I am surprised nobody else has mentioned so far. Of course I am not really just a DI guy so who knows. Right now the criteria for separation is that you must be a returning state medalist and you must win your region in order to be separated / placed (can't remember the appropriate wording) in the bracket. The one area I can see this needing improvement is when two returning state medalists meet in the finals of their region. We have all seen this happen time and time again (the Chattanooga probably area has it occur most frequently). I feel that a returning state medalist who loses in their region finals to another returning state medalist should still be separated in the bracket. This would give you a more fair distribution of wrestlers in circumstances where this occurs. Of course the wrestler should be separated below priority from all other wrestlers who were returning state medalists and did win their region.

 

Ex. Lets say there were 3 returning state medalists who won their region and a 4th returning state medalist who lost in the region finals to one of the 1st three wrestlers mentioned. In this case the fourth wrestler would be separated (probably into the #4 spot) and in the opposite half of the bracket from the wrestler who won his region (so in my 4 seed example the region champ would need to be in the 2 or 3 seeds location). Of course this likely complicates the separation and matching of 1's to 4's and 2's to 3's but I think most would agree that they would rather prioritize the returning state medalist.

 

Just something for you DI coaches to ponder and for those of you who are motivated, propose to the TSSAA as a change. I think it would aid your tournament along with some true double elimination.

[TheBrave300]

GHouse,

is one of the changes you were referring to Carlos Callaway moving to 112? Can you elaborate on any other moves? Barrel

 

That is one I have heard potential for. There are others but I don't try and spread the rumors since nothing is definite, especially when the time until it is all known is so short.

 

Some will be watching to see if weight changes from the duals stay for individuals. Others, just some of the normal surprise moves that always occur at the seeding meeting.

 

I've heard similiar rumors about Calloway going to 112 as well while at the State Duals this past weekend.

[ghouse]

GHouse,

is one of the changes you were referring to Carlos Callaway moving to 112? Can you elaborate on any other moves? Barrel

 

That is one I have heard potential for. There are others but I don't try and spread the rumors since nothing is definite, especially when the time until it is all known is so short.

 

Some will be watching to see if weight changes from the duals stay for individuals. Others, just some of the normal surprise moves that always occur at the seeding meeting.

 

I've heard similiar rumors about Calloway going to 112 as well while at the State Duals this past weekend.

 

His weigh-in weights would certainly indicate that was the plan.

[In Hoc Signo Vinces]

Well what are the seeds?

[ghouse]

Well what are the seeds?

 

They are still arguing through the seeds.

[cbg]

Why all of the arguing? What happened to the day's when one coach would tell all of the other coaches to "place my kid where you want in the bracket" he will win the tournament no matter where he is placed. People are getting much too soft!!!

[BayouBear]

Why all of the arguing? What happened to the day's when one coach would tell all of the other coaches to "place my kid where you want in the bracket" he will win the tournament no matter where he is placed. People are getting much too soft!!!

 

 

cbg - It still happens. BUT then all the other coaches argue to get their kid on the other side of the bracket.

[barrel]

GHouse,

I can certainly respect your position with regard to potentially spreading rumors about weight changes ect... You are correct, it is my understanding that the seeding meeting took several hours and the brackets are now complete. Do you know when they will be posted? Barrel

[Sommers]

So true, Ghouse!

 

Flying rumors can lead to other things flying, no doubt...

 

Notice the purple sky.

 

Perhaps even other interesting things like BCB and Harry Thorton and maybe Whisky Joe and Raider76 may all appreciate...

 

Sorry, I couldn't resist!!

 

See you guys over there Next week, I think my short bus can get my gut, the radio, + a 4th place finish medal, some 25 miles to the Cow Palace!!

[shootfirst]

I still don't see the point in seperating medalist from a previous year? If you won your region you face a 4 from another region and that should be enough . Lets say even before regions are wrestled the TSSAA would put out a bracket and you would just slot in how you qualify.It might make people pay closer attention to what is happenning in a region other than their own.Say the number 1 qualifier in region 8 would be sloted against the 4 from Region 6 it would have both looking at the other regions finishes to have a look ahead at who they might face.If two previous medalist in the same region finish 1 and 2 in their region they still would get seperated in differant halves of the bracket.Seperating previous medalists just seems like unnecessary headache. Double elimination along with preset slotting would make for a much truer finish.

[ynotme]

Is this Sommers dude on crack? Your posts make no sense and don't have anything to do with the thread topic. You must be hitting something hard.

[silverpie]

I still don't see the point in seperating medalist from a previous year? If you won your region you face a 4 from another region and that should be enough . Lets say even before regions are wrestled the TSSAA would put out a bracket and you would just slot in how you qualify.It might make people pay closer attention to what is happenning in a region other than their own.Say the number 1 qualifier in region 8 would be sloted against the 4 from Region 6 it would have both looking at the other regions finishes to have a look ahead at who they might face.If two previous medalist in the same region finish 1 and 2 in their region they still would get seperated in differant halves of the bracket.Seperating previous medalists just seems like unnecessary headache. Double elimination along with preset slotting would make for a much truer finish.

 

Now you get into a real risk of throwing matches. If a region's third-place wrestler will get the runner-up of a top-quality region, while 4th will face the winner of a weak region, you would at least have the perception of someone trying to lose the match.