|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Discussion Topic: MAC Tournament - Projected Seeds/Discussion
Ethan Moore added to this discussion on February 25, 2009
|
Posted this on the national forum, thought we could have Ohio based discussion here. (KSU, OU, and wrestlers competing for MAC schools)
Projected seeds based on MAC duals. I project KSU with 6 one seeds. The dual win over CMU, where they won every toss up weight, was very important to cement NQ’s.
Projected qualification spots, pre wild card selection, next to the weight. (I may be high, admitted MAC fan)
MAC records (very odd, I have 3 teams at 1-4)
KSU - 5-0
CMU - 4-1
OU - 3-2
NIU - 1-4
UB - 1-4
EMU - 1-4
125 – (2 NQs) Bedelyon gets a huge win in the dual, cementing the 1 seed
1. Bedelyon - KSU
2. Sentes - CMU
3. Jenkins - EMU
4. Montemayor - NIU
5. Bishop - UB
6. Silvers - OU
133 – (4 NQs) Unreal weight in the MAC, as many as five could qualify for gold or silver NCAA qualification. How many spots will the MAC get here? Mitcheff has wins over Beebe and Bishop, but was pinned by DeShazer. Clair beat DeShazer, but lost to Keyes this weekend. Beebe has wins over everyone except Mitcheff.
1. Mitcheff - KSU
2. Beebe - CMU
3. Bishop - UB
4. Clair - EMU
5. DeShazer - NIU
6. Keyes - OU
141 – (2 NQs) Another great weight. If I’m not mistaken, four returning NQ’s (CMU faithful, did Kruger go in 07?). McLemore is the returning champ, but has losses to Shutich and Lashaway. Lashaway the clear 1 seed.
1. Lashaway - KSU
2. Shutich/Kruger - CMU
3. McLemore - NIU
4. Lindsey - OU
5. Pinnear - EMU
6. Lewandowski - UB
149 – (2 NQs) Green has the big win, beating Brown in the dual.
1. Green - UB
2. Brown - CMU
3. Zimmerman - NIU
4. Johnson - EMU
5. Sponseller - KSU
6. Morton - OU
157 – (1 NQ, have to win to go) Tucker is 4-1 in MAC Duals, the lone loss a fall to Deutsch. Deutsch has losses to Moulton and Tice, who Tucker beat.
1. Tucker - OU
2. Grayson/Cubberly - CMU
3. Tice - KSU
4. Moulton - EMU
5. Deutsch - NIU
6. Cannon - UB
165 – (2 NQ) Pretty cut and dry here, although Hendrick beat Simpson in the last couple weeks of the season.
1. Stewart - CMU
2. Weinkam - OU
3. Simpson - KSU
4. O’Connor - NIU
5. Majerus - UB
6. Hendrick - EMU
174 – (2 NQ)
1. Miller - CMU
2. Ison/Purdue - OU
3. Rock - UB
4. Estep - KSU
5. Funk - EMU
6. Yant - NIU
184 – (3 NQs)
1. Kilgore - KSU
2. DiDona - CMU
3. Schuth - OU
4. Moran - UB
5. Dieckhaus - NIU
6. Foore - EMU
197 – (1 NQ)
1. Chine - KSU
2. Simaz - CMU
3. Hamel - UB
4. McClure - EMU
5. Penny - NIU
6. Iammarino - OU
285 – (2 NQ)
1. Porter - KSU
2. Trice - CMU
3. Wade - EMU
4. Powell - OU
5. Greenhaw - NIU
6. Correll - UB
|
|
|
|
|
Discussion Topic: MAC Tournament - Projected Seeds/Discussion
Ethan Moore added to this discussion on February 25, 2009
|
Also, they only seed four for the tournament, but I followed each weight through to the end to list full participants for discussion sake.
|
|
|
|
|
Discussion Topic: MAC Tournament - Projected Seeds/Discussion
Pat Costilow added to this discussion on February 25, 2009
|
I think you have too many qualifiers chalked up to the conference. When we talked to Coach Andrassy last night on OWR, he said the way the EMU coach had figured it out, the MAC would get 17 qualifiers, one less than last year. The four teams that aren't CMU and Kent need to pick up the ball here to help out the conference.
As far as 125, the Bedelyon win over Sentes was enormous, but has little bearing here. Nobody will touch either of these two, and they will meet in the finals, regardless of who is 1 and who is 2. There is a mental edge involved, though.
|
|
|
|
|
Discussion Topic: MAC Tournament - Projected Seeds/Discussion
Josh Lowe added to this discussion on February 26, 2009
|
Pat:
I agree that this hasn't been a banner year for the MAC beyond Kent and Central. It's staggering how far down Northern Illinois has slid, and Ohio hasn't hit the growth that some thought was possible (maybe next year - let me rephrase that to probably). Unfortunately Buffalo and Eastern are towards the bottom of DI in terms of quality (though EMU is improving imo).
Non-related but interesting, Central is a top ten-to-fifteen dual meet team yet 25th in the most-recent tournament strength rankings. Kent's aligned in the mid-teens in both types of ranking.
|
|
|
|
|
Discussion Topic: MAC Tournament - Projected Seeds/Discussion
Pat Costilow added to this discussion on February 26, 2009
|
Neibert and McGookey are huge recruits for NIU, especially the former.
|
|
|
|
|
Discussion Topic: MAC Tournament - Projected Seeds/Discussion
Ethan Moore added to this discussion on February 26, 2009
|
All true points. I was hoping that the new format would help the MAC, but perhaps it won't. Schuth and Weinkam both could have qualified for the SIlver standard had they wrestled more often I believe. 33 and 41 will be as tough to qualify from the MAC than any conference in the country.
As to UB and EMU, I think they're making positive strides. EMU now has David Bolyard on staff and I see real improvement in how they've competed. UB has some tough young kids, including the freshman Green at 49.
Josh, I agree about NIU. Not sure if they had issues with some classes but they seem to always be starting several freshmen. I know that Burke transferred to Iowa State and is starting there, that had to have a negative impact on the 08-09 results. McLemore and Deshazer are still dangerous.
The main point is, however, that the other four teams need to improve for the MAC to see results at nationals.
Kent looks to me to have an easy path to 6 qualifiers, and can do some damage in St. Louis.
|
|
|
|
|
Discussion Topic: MAC Tournament - Projected Seeds/Discussion
Ethan Moore added to this discussion on February 26, 2009
|
Per today's announcement, allocation by weight:
125 - 2
133 - 3
141 - 2
149 - 2
157 - 1
165 - 1
174 - 2
184 - 3
197 - 1
285 - 2
Of the remaining 52 spots, I would guess another handful come from the MAC. My original speculation was 21 before WC, which turned out to be ambitous.
|
|
|
|
|
Discussion Topic: MAC Tournament - Projected Seeds/Discussion
Josh Lowe added to this discussion on February 26, 2009
|
Conversely, sources inside the MAC were talking about 17 AQ's (at least that's what Andrassy indicated on OWR).
If you look at the AQ's, I don't see any MAC weights where a kid that could win multiple matches at nationals is operating on an incredibly low margin at the conference tournament - which was the case in the past.
There will not be that 149# weight from a couple of years back where Midlands champ Grimes (Northern Illinois) doesn't make it out - because he was 4th. There will be no 141# from last year where Eric Kruger (a wrestler that beat national champ Jaggers at the National Duals) doesn't get out because he finished 4th. (1) the AQ's are reflective. (2) if not for #1, they would pick up one of those 4-6 at large spots left.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
