SocraTease

There are lots of problems with the Hodge voting. A guy can take an early or unusual loss and, yes, actually still be the best NCAA wrestler. Guys get caught or have a bad day or are sick or injured. That should be considered. If, for example, Brooks took an early loss in the season but came back to dominate should he be excluded from consideration? I say "no". The Hodge voting, like most of America, has this terrible tendency toward "purity" -- no losses with close wins and a weak division or schedule is construed as better than complete dominance over an entire season against great opponents ... with the possible exception of, say, one loss against a good opponent (or even moving up a weight for the team). The Hodge voting committee should clarify whether All Star matches count or not. A decision might affect ome of the best wrestlers who might elect not to wrestle those matches if they aren't ready or fear a loss. It can encourage avoidance. And is bad for the sport. The current Hodge procedures seem to discourage guys and teams from moving up a weight during a dual to win. That used to be an exciting element of wrestling. The long and short: take into consideration the important variables. Yes, criteria for the Hodge matter greatly, but make them (a) as clear as possible (prioritize the order or make them weighted as a percentage) and (b) make them reflect the reality of the sport "on the ground" so as to encourage competition rather than reflect narrow statistical goals or largely subjective, popular, fan-based voting.

And who are we speaking about here? Please name names

I probably put it in to grab some attention. You know . . . the way that Jonathan Swift immodestly included recipes for eating children in his "A Modest Proposal" as a form of extended irony in order to gain some interest in the issues he was raising about poverty, homelessness, the great need for adoption (reduction of unwanted babies), and the like. In his case at least, it worked.

It's my general sense that pins are likely down in number over the past few years. That is, that they are likely less common occurrences at the NCAA level as a whole. So, I'm wondering: 1. Is that in fact the case? What do the statistics actually say over a 3 year period? 5 year period. 10 or 20 year period? 2. If it is the case, what are the likely or possible reasons (causes)? More scrambling? More defensive wrestling? More emphasis on majors and tech falls? A change in levels of competition? Less emphasis by coaches? Something else? 3. If pins are (or should be) valued as the way to score the most points for a team and as the best and most reliable way to end a match in victory for individuals, what can be done to change this situation or trend if in fact it exist? To Wrestleknownothing (who seems to know quite a bit), do you have any data on this issue?

Steveson was an exception to the general rule. Look at the history of Hodge. Many are big pinners: Sanderson (3 times), Askren (two times), Taylor (2 times), Retherford (two times), etc. Last year, Mason Parris had 11 pins. None of the so-called Hodge candidates this year have anywhere near even that number, except Hendrickson (who is not even on some of the lists). If the powers-that-be want pinning to be de-emphasized, then revise the Hodge criteria. And make sure you check if Dan Hodge has rolled over in his grave. If you don't want to exhume him, then consult Ben Askren for his thoughts or even Wade Schalles. They will both chew the cauliflower ears off the wrestling community on this point about pinning.

Hendrickson has FAR more pins than any of these guys. He has a far higher dominance score than any of these guys. He has more wins than any of these guys but two. I'm not saying he should or will win the Hodge (he very likely won't). It's just that he deserves consideration at THIS POINt in the season. Jan 10, 2024 Feb 19, 2024 RANK NAME SCHOOL WEIGHT YEAR Previous RECORD PINS BONUS RATE DOMINANCE SCORE 1 Aaron Brooks Penn State 197 SR 2 14-0 4 92% 4.92 2 Carter Starocci Penn State 174 SR 1 11-0 3 90% 4.9 3 Keegan O'Toole Missouri 165 JR 3 16-0 6 81% 4.81 4 Trent Hidlay NC State 197 SR 5 21-0 4 85% 4.76 5 Parker Keckeisen UNI 184 JR 6 19-0 2 78% 5.1 6 Greg Kerkvliet Penn State 285 SR 4 12-0 1 75% 4.16 7 Ridge Lovett Nebraska 149 JR 8 21-0 6 61% 4.19 8 Levi Haines Penn State 157 SO 12 14-0 3 64% 4.28 9 Mitchell Mesenbrink Penn State 165 FR NR 17-0 3 70% 4.47 10 Daton Fix Oklahoma State 133 SR 14 12-0 1 75% 4.16 11 Vinny Zerban Northern Colorado 157 SO NR 18-0 2 77% 4.88 12 Ryan Crookham Lehigh 133 FR 7 14-0 1 64% 3.85 13 Yonger Bastida Iowa State 285 SR 10 19-0 0 68% 3.89 14 Beau Bartlett Penn State 141 SR 11 17-0 4 41% 3.88

Well, there are criteria for the voting, and they are supposed to be followed or minimally taken into account. There are criteria for referees as well. Are you just going to say, the refs can and will do whatever they want to do.? Same for juries and judges. It's not (or shouldn't be) a popularity contest but that is the way too many Americans think and act unfortunately. They think everything from beauty to truth is purely subjective. The Hodge was originally created to celebrate and honor guys who pin, and pinning is still one of the top criteria. Hendrickson does that. Askren did that. So did Nolf, Taylor, Nickal and Retherford. Far lower down are past achievements. It's not a career award.

I'm curious why Wyatt Hendrickson isn't being talked about and isn't even included in some of the Hodge rankings (e.g., FLO). Here are the Hodge criteria from the NCAA wrestling website: Originally created to celebrate the pin in college wrestling, the Dan Hodge Trophy is based on seven criteria including record, number of pins, dominance, past credentials, quality of competition, sportsmanship/citizenship and heart. The trophy is based primarily on the results of a single season, but past accomplishments are considered as well, particularly in years where the competition is tighter. Hendrickson is 19-0. He has an 89% bonus rate. He leads the NCAA Division I in pins again this year. It's something like 15 and counting. He's also won the Schalles Award for most pins the last two years, and he will likely win it again. None of the other Hodge candidates are even close to those number of pins. He was the most dominant wrestler statistically the last two years and will probably be so this year. He won the U23 Worlds at 125K in fall 2023. Last season, he was 31-2 and only lost to the NCAA champ and runner up. The prior seasons he was 26-2. Yes, he was hammered by Kerkviliet at the All Star match (while likely injured), but I don't believe that counts for Hodge. On sheer statistical evidence, a case could even be made that he should be ranked first. And, no I don't expect him to win 285, but the guy's numbers are impressive. If somehow he would win out he has to be in the Hodge conversation.

Will we see KOT vs. Carr this weekend? Mizz is schedule to wrestle Iowa State. And both wrestlers to my awareness have been healthy and wrestled recently. If wrestling coaches are serious about building or even maintaining a fan base, they better put them out there. If these guys are held out, they are probably going to meet at the conference championship anyway.

I tend to construe this post as provocative and not-so-serious, but if I were to indulge I would raise at least 10 points to consider: 1. PSU will likely take all 10 starters to the Big Dance this year. Other years, they have only had as few as 8 go and still won it handily. 2. A few weeks ago, many people were talking about PSU breaking the all-time scoring record. What has transpired since then? Answer: not much besides the end of the season approaching and long break before conference championships so there is not much to discuss besides counterfactuals and hypotheticals. 3. Who has a reasonable chance of beating PSU even if they falter? I don't see anyone reasonably suggesting another team can do it. Take a look at the projected gap in predicted team scoring numbers based on seeds that FLO, Intermat, and wrestling sites have put together. It's a long way to catch up. 4. PSU tends to rise historically to the occasion at Nationals. Most other teams do not. It's just a statistical fact. Need we remind ourselves that PSU has won 10 team titles in the last 12 years, including the last 2. 5. PSU has recently had all ten guys ranked in the top 10 (or 12) something that hasn't happened in their team history ever, if memory serves. 5 of their guys are currently ranked #1 by all the ranking services. 6. PSU presently has 6 UNDEFEATED wrestlers heading into conference action. I repeat: 6. 7. PSU has two 3-time NCAA champions on their roster as well as 2 finalists (second place) from last year, along with a 3rd place finisher, fourth place finisher, and a fifth place finisher. That's 7 returning All Americans. 8. Despite the drop in bonus numbers last year, PSU usually scores more than almost all other teams in bonus points. 9. PSU has 3 guys on their roster who have not surrendered a takedown all year (CS, AB, and GK). 10. PSU has one not-so-secret weapon (Sanderson) and one more secret weapon (Cunningham). Can PSU falter and the team race get closer than expected? It's certainly possible. Is it likely? Well, if you think so, I'm sure there is somewhere you can place a bet on that. Hell, maybe even Jimmy C. will step forward.

6 Penn State guys still undefeated. 1/3 of all the remaining wrestlers. Impressive. If Van Ness was still in the lineup, there is a good chance it would be 7.

I think that most of criteria related to seeding is based on performance within the Big Ten conference: head to head matches, record against Big Ten opponents, etc. To me, one of the most awaited decisions will be the conference allocations and pre-allocation numbers.

I could be wrong but I seem to think pre-seeds come out early in the week prior to the Saturday-Sunday tournament (March 9 and 10) and then are confirmed or adjusted by coaches a day or two prior to the start. But someone out there may have a more exact answer.

You beat me to the question. As for top seeds, that seems pretty straightforward: Ramos Ragusin Bartlett Lovett Haines Hamiti / Mesenbrink Starrocci Salazar Brooks Kerkviliet

You can tell Manning has rage issues. The guy is a waiting heart attack

I don't think it is going to happen. I think he should go 79KG for the non-Olympic weights and World Championships in October

Meyer Shapiro is slick but Haines is tough as nails and fundamentally very sound. He usually can counter the funk. But it promises to be a great match if/when it happens.

Watching guys like Manning (Brands and Bono, too) scream and make faces during a match gives me a sense of their desperation. And subsequently it seems hard to root for them.

I think that Hidlay vs. Brooks is going to be a bruising dogfight at both NCAAs and Trials for the right to meet Taylor. Hidlay has been running through everyone at 197 this year and also has done well at freestyle. Both Hidlay and Brooks are very short, muscular, and prone to using underhooks. Not sure if that is an advantage or disadvantage versus DT, who has countered the best underhooks in the world against Yazdani. I want to see Nolf against Boroughs for the right to meet Dake. O'Toole vs. Mesenbrink could be a good quarterfinal matchup at 74KG and Monday has looked very good of late as well. I can't picture Starocci making 74KG and it's hard to imagine Retherford down at 65KG again. I think the latter should go 74 KG (a long shot) and then drop back to 70KG for the non-Olympic World Championships in the fall (after the Olympics).

Barnett got decked by McKee. The 4th time McKee has pinned him in their 10 matches over the years

Askren has been coaching for years at Askren Wrestling Academy (AWA) with his brother. Supposedly, it is one of the best clubs. He's helped to produce a whole bunch of elite guys: Kegan O'Toole, Mesenbrink, Keckheisen, etc. He goes to tournaments with his kids and has fed many of them into the best college schools. https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCo6F2kLzD59li40zNKSeX7g/videos

More like 15 to 0. The Ohio State guy at 125 did nothing. He didn't deserve the win. And should have been given a second stalling call.

It's the placebo effect. It makes you feel better. A lot of elevator and cross walk buttons employ that psychology. The buttons don't do anything but they give the person waiting the illusion of having done something, usually just expressing their impatience.

Wrestling on a knee should initiate a 5 count and stalling call. It is purely an avoidance position.