peanut Posted March 13, 2023 Share Posted March 13, 2023 Is there some historical reason for there being 33 NCAA qualifiers per weight? Seems like 32 would make more sense. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PencilNeck Posted March 13, 2023 Share Posted March 13, 2023 Why does Radio Shack ask for your phone number when you buy batteries? 2 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ionel Posted March 13, 2023 Share Posted March 13, 2023 1 hour ago, peanut said: Is there some historical reason for there being 33 NCAA qualifiers per weight? Seems like 32 would make more sense. Because someone on the planning committee had been concussed too many times and thought 33 looked like a nice even number. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DocBB Posted March 13, 2023 Share Posted March 13, 2023 I was wondering the exact sam thing today...I mean if your gonna go 33 why not go 35 or 40? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gimpeltf Posted March 13, 2023 Share Posted March 13, 2023 It was 36. Then they phased out D2-(2) and D3- (1) late 80s early 90s. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CHROMEBIRD Posted March 13, 2023 Share Posted March 13, 2023 21 minutes ago, gimpeltf said: It was 36. Then they phased out D2-(2) and D3- (1) late 80s early 90s. A crime committed upon us fans. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lu_alum Posted March 13, 2023 Share Posted March 13, 2023 It was 36. Then they phased out D2-(2) and D3- (1) late 80s early 90s.I believe that happened at the same time the fully-funded scholarship cap went from 11 to 9.9 (10% reduction). Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SocraTease Posted March 14, 2023 Share Posted March 14, 2023 I speculate it was because NCAA basketball went first to the silly idea of a few play-in games to add to the 64 team bracket and get 68. That was obviously a move based on money (more games, more TV commercials and advertising, and hence more revenue). I suspect NCAA wrestling thought the idea was cute and would add some kind of interest or intrigue or drama to have a pigtail match. Obviously, it doesn't generate either revenue or additional interest except for wrestler #33 and his family Either that ... or because 33 is: the largest positive integer that cannot be expressed as a sum of different triangular numbers. the smallest odd repdigit that is not a prime number. the sum of the first four positive factorials. the sum of the sum of the divisors of the first six positive integers the sum of three cubes 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alces Alces Gigas Posted March 14, 2023 Share Posted March 14, 2023 It used to be(and still is) 330 wrestlers but before the recent formula based auto qualification process with 33 wrestlers per weight, some weights might have 35 others 29. 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Offthemat Posted March 14, 2023 Share Posted March 14, 2023 Dang! I thought it was because there were too many ties for 32nd. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eagle26 Posted March 14, 2023 Share Posted March 14, 2023 It used to be(and still is) 330 wrestlers but before the recent formula based auto qualification process with 33 wrestlers per weight, some weights might have 35 others 29. That’s right. It didn’t matter back then that it was 330 qualifiers because the brackets weren’t all going to be nice and neat anyway. Then when they switched to the new formula, no one wanted to vote to get rid of an extra qualifier per weight even though it would make more sense to have an even 32 man bracket Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lu_alum Posted March 14, 2023 Share Posted March 14, 2023 That’s right. It didn’t matter back then that it was 330 qualifiers because the brackets weren’t all going to be nice and neat anyway. Then when they switched to the new formula, no one wanted to vote to get rid of an extra qualifier per weight even though it would make more sense to have an even 32 man bracketPrior to the current field size of 33, it was a larger tourney. Yes, the single pigtail was introduced when the current AQ and ‘at-large’ process replaced the process based on the five-year R12 average and ‘Wild Card’ system. The drop to 33 occurred around the same time the eleven scholarships were dropped to 9.9. Here is an example of a bracket with nearly 360 participants. 40 pigtails and two ‘byes’ made a field of 358. Eight pigtails at 134 and 167. http://www.wrestlingstats.com/ncaa/pdf/brackets/NCAA%201989.pdfSent from my iPad using Tapatalk 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gimpeltf Posted March 14, 2023 Share Posted March 14, 2023 I think the scholarship drop was a year or two later but yes close in time. Also around when the coach limit of 4 came into play. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D3 for LU Posted March 14, 2023 Share Posted March 14, 2023 Wait... Radio Shack is still in business? D3 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lu_alum Posted March 14, 2023 Share Posted March 14, 2023 I think the scholarship drop was a year or two later but yes close in time. Also around when the coach limit of 4 came into play.It took Minnesota a while to get the memo on that one. I seem to remember them having upwards of 7-8 Administrative Assistants around the time the Schlatter brothers were graduating. Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SocraTease Posted March 14, 2023 Share Posted March 14, 2023 I like the idea of inviting the top 2 placers in the Division II tournament and the top guy in Division III to the Division I dance. Give them a low seeding (even #'s 31-33) and see what they can do. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wrestleknownothing Posted March 14, 2023 Share Posted March 14, 2023 1 hour ago, SocraTease said: I like the idea of inviting the top 2 placers in the Division II tournament and the top guy in Division III to the Division I dance. Give them a low seeding (even #'s 31-33) and see what they can do. I like this idea, but instead of taking the place of 31-33, how about having 4 pigtails instead of 1? 33 gets D2 champ, 32 gets D3 champ, 31 gets D2 runner up, and 30 gets 29 in the four pigtails. 2 Drowning in data, but thirsting for knowledge Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alces Alces Gigas Posted March 14, 2023 Share Posted March 14, 2023 6 hours ago, SocraTease said: I like the idea of inviting the top 2 placers in the Division II tournament and the top guy in Division III to the Division I dance. Give them a low seeding (even #'s 31-33) and see what they can do. Why an auto low seed? If they deserve it, seed them! Don't ruin a d1 studs tourney by not seeding them 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Offthemat Posted March 14, 2023 Share Posted March 14, 2023 1 hour ago, Alces Alces Gigas said: Why an auto low seed? If they deserve it, seed them! Don't ruin a d1 studs tourney by not seeding them I like that idea. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TexRef Posted March 14, 2023 Share Posted March 14, 2023 11 hours ago, D3 for LU said: Wait... Radio Shack is still in business? D3 Only in places that don't have internet 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D3 for LU Posted March 14, 2023 Share Posted March 14, 2023 1 hour ago, TexRef said: Only in places that don't have internet Shhhhh... The 1st session has just been completed and he's waiting on the results. D3 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Voice of the Quakers Posted March 14, 2023 Share Posted March 14, 2023 13 hours ago, SocraTease said: I like the idea of inviting the top 2 placers in the Division II tournament and the top guy in Division III to the Division I dance. Give them a low seeding (even #'s 31-33) and see what they can do. Many of us on these boards remember when the DII and DIII champs did a lot of damage at the NCAA DI tournament: Carlton Haselrig of UPJ, Karl Monaco of Montclair State, just to name a couple wrestlers. I believe the NCAA ended DII and DIII participation in all NCAA DI championships (track, too) in order to "preserve the integrity of competition within each division". I don't believe this change did any favors to DII or DIII wrestling. Dan McDonald, Penn '93 danmc167@yahoo.com Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wrestleknownothing Posted March 14, 2023 Share Posted March 14, 2023 Bring back NAIA too, while we are at it. I think this is the complete list of non-D1 D1 champs. Bolded and underlined means they were also outstanding wrestler that year. 1 Drowning in data, but thirsting for knowledge Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TexRef Posted March 14, 2023 Share Posted March 14, 2023 2 hours ago, Voice of the Quakers said: Many of us on these boards remember when the DII and DIII champs did a lot of damage at the NCAA DI tournament: Carlton Haselrig of UPJ, Karl Monaco of Montclair State, just to name a couple wrestlers. I believe the NCAA ended DII and DIII participation in all NCAA DI championships (track, too) in order to "preserve the integrity of competition within each division". I don't believe this change did any favors to DII or DIII wrestling. There were too many complaining that "they already went to Nationals, they shouldn't be able to take away from the D1 kids!" That my friends, was the birthplace of the snowflake. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TexRef Posted March 14, 2023 Share Posted March 14, 2023 2 hours ago, Wrestleknownothing said: Bring back NAIA too, while we are at it. I think this is the complete list of non-D1 D1 champs. Bolded and underlined means they were also outstanding wrestler that year. You would figure that the NCAA would look at it from a money grab position, and add back the NAIA, D3, & D2 top placing kids. I am surprised we don't have a 64 man bracket! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now