Sign in to follow this  
VisionQuest

State Seeds and brackets

Recommended Posts

Unfortunately Carr didn't have a coach sitting in on the seed meeting conference call last night, so they had no representation. As far as bias goes I didn't see any unbiased things. Coaches must be present at seed meeting to fight for their kids seeds.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, twenhofelcoach said:

Unfortunately Carr didn't have a coach sitting in on the seed meeting conference call last night, so they had no representation. As far as bias goes I didn't see any unbiased things. Coaches must be present at seed meeting to fight for their kids seeds.

Carr most likely didnt because of the time they finished last night. I left our region at 7 and wrestling was still going on. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, twenhofelcoach said:
35 minutes ago, JC1 said:

Zac Cowan beat Conner Lee but yet Lee got the 2 and Cowan drew the 4. Really???

When they wrestled, the score was close (6-2) but at no point did you ever think Lee was going to come back and win. Cowan controlled the entire match.

Perception could lead one to believe there is a NKY bias......

Unfortunately Carr didn't have a coach sitting in on the seed meeting conference call last night, so they had no representation. As far as bias goes I didn't see any unbiased things. Coaches must be present at seed meeting to fight for their kids seeds.

No bias at all.  The 4 coaches of the regional winners have to agree on the seeding.  As was mentioned, Cowan had no representation on the call which is likely why he ended up as the #4.

If the bracket goes chalk, Cowan and Lee will meet in the semi's, so he'll get a chance to show if he did deserve the 1. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, coachteater said:

Carr most likely didnt because of the time they finished last night. I left our region at 7 and wrestling was still going on. 

May be the case but other coaches from that youth region were on the call. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎2‎/‎1‎/‎2016 at 1:09 PM, rjs4470 said:

No bias at all.  The 4 coaches of the regional winners have to agree on the seeding.  As was mentioned, Cowan had no representation on the call which is likely why he ended up as the #4.

If the bracket goes chalk, Cowan and Lee will meet in the semi's, so he'll get a chance to show if he did deserve the 1. 

Actually won't meet until finals if they both win semi's.  Cowan, being a 4 seed would meet the 1 seed in semi's while Lee being a 2 seed would meet the 3 seed if seeding holds.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, VisionQuest said:

Actually won't meet until finals if they both win semi's.  Cowan, being a 4 seed would meet the 1 seed in semi's while Lee being a 2 seed would meet the 3 seed if seeding holds.

That's correct....was thinking Lee got the 1 overall. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

#1, #2, and #4 on the same side of the bracket at 80/82. Terrible seeding. Was told a coach voiced their opinion about this during the seeding meeting but "no one gave a s***" about his opinion. Even with representation and trying to fight for seeds, this bracket turned out like high school state tournament with random draw. Very disappointing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Once again fellas, it's plain and simple.... Rangers rankings are just that rankings on what information he has seen. If 3 of the top four kids from Rangers rankings are in the same region then they can't all get one seeds. Each Regional winner is who gets seeded 1-4. The rest are drawn in the  one and 4 regional placers from the same region travel with each other in a sixteen man bracket. The 2 and 3 regional placers are put in the opposite side of the bracket. We as coaches can't keep track of every one of our wrestlers matches and most of the time we don't even get to see or wrestle half the teams in the state. And no one mentioned Zac's win against Lee. Anyone from Carr wrestling's program could have been in the conference call. And yes no representation will usually mean the 4 seed. It's like going to court without a lawyer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Who cares about seeding? If you're going to win state, you might as well leave no doubt and take on anyone at any time. I had the pleasure of coaching Blaine Frazier last year and that's precisely what he did. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, twenhofelcoach said:

No it does not, seeding criteria for the one seeds was head to head this year, then returning state placer, then common opponents, then records

 

8 hours ago, twenhofelcoach said:

Unfortunately Carr didn't have a coach sitting in on the seed meeting conference call last night, so they had no representation. As far as bias goes I didn't see any unbiased things. Coaches must be present at seed meeting to fight for their kids seeds.

Which one is it?  Head to head or coach on the call fighting for their kid.  If there is a criteria then it should be followed whether the Coach is on the call or not.  Otherwise it does end up looking like a bias of some sort.  

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, REscalera said:

 

Which one is it?  Head to head or coach on the call fighting for their kid.  If there is a criteria then it should be followed whether the Coach is on the call or not.  Otherwise it does end up looking like a bias of some sort.  

 Very few tournaments report results. When you ask for results it's like pulling teeth. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Chris Duke said:

 Very few tournaments report results. When you ask for results it's like pulling teeth. 

I agree with you on that point. We can certainly improve in that area.  However, if head to head is the first criteria and only one of the coaches was not on the call, that means the other was.  So if the question is asked it should be quite simple.  The head to head doesn't go out the window because one of the coaches isn't on the call.   The kid earned it and the way it ended up can certainly leave others thinking bias.   

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, REscalera said:

I agree with you on that point. We can certainly improve in that area.  However, if head to head is the first criteria and only one of the coaches was not on the call, that means the other was.  So if the question is asked it should be quite simple.  The head to head doesn't go out the window because one of the coaches isn't on the call.   The kid earned it and the way it ended up can certainly leave others thinking bias.   

It didnt, but head to head only works when your seeding two wrestlers (or trying to decipher between two wrestlers for a seed).  Different animal when you are seeding 4. 

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, JC1 said:

Not there to fight for their wrestler? So that's an automatic four-seed? That's not an efficient or fair way to seed.  The governing body needs to create black-and-white seeding criteria. Then coaches need to support  the process and fact-finding  with integrity.  So when times like this present itself, when coaches are unavailable. A neutral system is process can override opinion, bias, or whatever. But rationale of fighting for your wrestler is .....well fill in the blank

No not an automatic 4 seed, but it does make it difficult when the coach is not on the call to supply needed information.  It did surprise me that 6 teams were not represented on the call.  

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this