DIV II Brackets Posted!

[matfan]

Hey Sly,

 

I think it's always been this way for Div II, since everyone advances to the state tournament.

[BOBJONES1983]

BobJones1983,

 

My short term memory is not what it used to be.  I will change my comments to read...Keppy got the #2 seed based on his 2nd place finish from the 8th grade. It's been a long day at work, and when I check this site, I do not have time to research everything...thanks for keeping me straight!

 

My point being, Keppy did indeed get his seeding based on what he placed 4 years earlier! That takes us back to this year...Young cannot be seeded ahead of Simpson since they have not wrestled head to head and Simpson's past performances.

 

By the way...I am NOT Matt Provanzano, and I am not related to him either, but I do know him!

No because in Baucom's case there was no one who beat a medalist head-to-head. Now look at a different past scenario with a McCallie wrestler. Last year Lee Connell (McC) was seeded 2nd to Adam Stark (FR) who beat him head-to-head so he was seeded 1st. In that same weight there was another returning medalist named John Kranske (ND). He never wrestled Stark during the regular season however he was not seeded above him. Do you think it would have been fair to Stark if they seeded Kranske #1 above him just because they hadn't wrestled each other? No it wouldn't have been the right way to do it according to the guidelines of seeding.

 

Here are some more examples you can go look at on the TSSAA website.

(1)2003-215

(2)2002-119,130,145,171,189

At 189 in 2002. Rudolph (McC) was seeded second because he defeated Calloway(ND) who would have been the second seed. And he jumped ahead of three previous year medalists who he had not wrestled!

 

The point is there is no argument about it the seeds have always been done the same until now. The real seeds should be once again:

1)Young

2)Geismar

3)Simpson

Edited February 17, 2004 by BOBJONES1983

[bhs78]

silverpie-

 

The seedings first look at last years placers. Geismar beat Simpson in the semis last year and he then lost to Hiller in the finals taking second, Simpson took third. Therefore Geismar would be #1 seed and Simpson #2. However, Young from McCallie defeated Geismar in their last meeting this year. By the rules and guidelines of seeding that the TSSAA themselves have laid out, Young should then jump ahead of Geismar to the #1 seed with Geismar at #2 and Simpson at #3. Even though that might not seem fair it is clearly and has been clearly the rule for the last 4 or 5 years. What we have here is a case of either Frank Simpson or Jim Morgan calling up Ronnie Carter and complaining until he got his way. The way they originally had it seeded was the correct order. And R.C. and the TSSAA are contradicting themseleves and their guidlines of seeding by doing this. It is pretty sad and unfair, and they know that they need to change it back.

I believe simpson beat Geismar at the Mccallie Inv. Simpson and young havent wrestled so Young cannot be seated above simpson based on his 3rd place last year.

[mtnrasslin]

Lets see, last year Geismar places 2nd and Simpson 3rd. Young splits with Geismar with the loss being a major. However, Young wins the last match thereby getting a seed ahead of Geismar. With no head to head between Simpson and Young, Simpson gets seeded ahead because he placed last year and Young did not.

 

Not only does this follow the TSSAA guidelines but it is a realistic, common sense seeding.

[BOBJONES1983]

bhs78-

That was Whit Dunning (FR) that beat Geismar at the McCallie Tournament not Simpson. Go ahead and read my above post and two or three of my other posts on this thread to understand why Simpson and Young not wrestling has nothing to do with the seeding. Am I the only person on this thread that reads the facts and presents them instead of throwing made up matches, rules, and comments out there! No offense but the facts are there in clear print! Can no one read or comprehend them? Or maybe is it just that they don't want to? Is the truth too hard to bear?

[reftn]

Whew...lets call it settled?

[BOBJONES1983]

Lets see, last year Geismar places 2nd and Simpson 3rd. Young splits with Geismar with the loss being a major. However, Young wins the last match thereby getting a seed ahead of Geismar. With no head to head between Simpson and Young, Simpson gets seeded ahead because he placed last year and Young did not.

 

Not only does this follow the TSSAA guidelines but it is a realistic, common sense seeding.

mtnrasslin-

Go look at all 7 of the examples I presented as factual evidence in my post before yours of this very same scenario. It is easy to say "it follows TSSAA guidelines" but I have presented the actual guidelines and it DOES NOT follow them nor does it follow any other way that this has been handled by the TSSAA in the past.

[mtnrasslin]

Apparently we disagree.

[BOBJONES1983]

Apparently. But the difference is I have facts supporting my argument.

[mtnrasslin]

Apparently we disagree.

Sorry, I meant to say that you seem to disagree with both me and the TSSAA. They must not see your facts as such.

[usfjim]

These are the guidlines directly from the Wrestling Handbook at TSSAA.org.

 

Section V E. Wrestlers who meet the qualification shall be placed in each weight division in the state tournament. The criteria for placing shall be as follows:

 

1. Head-to-Head Competition during the regular season.

(a)If two oppenents have wrestled each other, the wrestler with more wins against the other will be the higher seed.

(b)If two opponents have the same number of wins against each other, the wrestler with the most recent win will be the higher seed. (Young defeated Geismar last)

 

2.Returning state champion from the previous year. In the case that more than one state champion is in the same weight class, the wrestler from the higher weightclass will be the higher seed. (Irrelevant here except...)

 

3.Follow the same procedure as #2 for 2nd place from previous year, 3rd place,...

 

so 1b should be adjusted to read; the wrestler with the most recent win in head to head, unless.....................there is a returning state placer who was has not wrestled a higher seed but was beaten by someone else and we need to invoke rule 2 as the number one criteria. what a joke!

 

good point bobjones1983.

[matfan]

BobJones1983,

 

Your Connell, Stark, Kranske example is not the same...they were all medalists.

 

I still think my example of Keppy is more in tune as to why they seeded Simpson higher this year...relevant to past medal performances.

 

Young has not placed at state, so he cannot be seeded above Simpson. I guess we will have to agree to disagree on the interpretation of the ruling.