TylerDurden

They do have the truck in their ears. But it's unlikely the director (or anyone in the truck) knows wrestling to that level. In football there are spotters next to the announcers to help identify players who make tackles, for instance, but it's hard to feed real-time, detailed information because while they can hear the broadcasters, the spotters/talent stats guys can't talk directly to them. If they gave it to him, it was via a written note. ESPN does more elaborate productions than just about anyone else, but the on-air talent needs to be prepared. In a former life, I was involved in many live sports broadcasts. To me, DC seemed a bit disorganized and unprepared/uninformed about the basics of the event names, brackets, etc., but his strategic commentary, energy and insights were decent-to-good. He doesn't do this a lot, so that would explain some of it. Rock really helped guide him along, IMO. All of that said, ESPN probably doesn't care about any of the DC's professional broadcaster shortcomings. DC isn't really there for anything other than cross-promotion, to be a hype man. Rock Harrison is the guy for the more refined commentary. IMO all of the analysts have their quirks, but Harrison is the best of that group since he stopped sounding like a referee training seminar and quit the, "a takedown is felt" stuff. Seems to me that he now simply describes what he saw and, when necessary, goes into the rule book to explain. ESPN (and CBS, FOX, NBC, etc.) goes into their events with a storyline and they don't often deviate from it. They discuss it in pre-production meetings and are trying to thread it together with each element of the broadcast: intros, players to watch, interviews, etc. It all serves to tell the story. This year, ESPN is hyping their MMA coverage as part of that, it seems. This is why the game/event productions are pretty darn good, even if the storylines are annoying to some fanbases. If it seems like they're talking more favorably about one team or wrestler, they probably are because they've prepared features and segments of the broadcast around those ideas. It's not because they hate your favorite school.

Kennedy is going to win that match. Conigliaro had no business being the No. 5 seed.

Damn. Did him dirty. Walmart version.

Michigan had a nice first round with 8/9 winning. DeAugustino lost at the buzzer.

My guys have some work to do. 6/10 in the consis after round one.

Iowa gonna finish 15th

I agree with this. Starocci isn't close to 100%. He's not working his way through the backside if he loses.

Kennedy goes down

Bouzakis is about to break the bracket in round two.

Penn State is in trouble... Of only scoring 135 point.

Am I wrong that Nagao was worse this year than he was last year? A case of surprising people vs being scouted?

Both things can be true: It's much easier to follow the tournament now than it was 30 years ago AND track's user interface is horrible. I understand why it's horrible, but that doesn't make it less horrible.

What are you on about? This is exactly how things should work for the NCAA Tournament. Qualify, test the injury...withdraw if you can't go. Alternates are ready for this reason.

He can think whatever he wants, but Baumann beat Wilson in the dual, 7-2.

If Brands is your standard-bearer...

Lincoln McIlravy is one of my all-time favorite wrestlers. Thanks for posting.

They failed at that task.

You aren't addressing me, but I think he's going to bonus everyone he sees. The B1G tournament stuff was all Cael voodoo, Jedi mind tricks.

Sneaky, sneaky

The side of the bracket isn't the issue. It's the actual seed line.

Notably, being a conference champion is not subjective. Neither is the performance in the last five matches, being outside of the top 30 coaches rank / RPI top 30, nor a "bad loss" to a wrestler with a <.500 win percentage. The only relatively subjective things on the "Subjective Considerations" list are best quality win (unless that's defined elsewhere) and wrestler availability. Perhaps is was a poorly labeled slide, but all but of couple of these are objective considerations.

I'll be honest, after seeing the draws I jumped right to Noto as a sleeper. But you're right, 125 results shouldn't surprise any of us.

Here goes nothing. Also, I get bonus points for being the first entry, yes? 125 | 18 DeAugustino 133 | 24 Chlebove 141 | 23 Fongaro 149 | 20 Williams 157 | 18 Zerban 165 | 21 Fish 174 | 22 Mocco 184 | 18 Rogotzke 197 | 21 Stout 285 | 26 Catka

I do appreciate how you couldn't give Brooks an L, even in a 2/10 troll.

On that note...Here are the lowest seeds I can see making the final. I don't necessarily think they will, but I do think these guys have the draws to make it happen if things go their way. 125 | 12 Noto 133 | 12 Latona 141 | 7 Happel 149 | 9 Swiderski 157 | 11 Lee 165 | 6 Caliendo 174 | 9 Starocci 184 | 14 Foca 197 | 3 Sloan 285 | 4 Schultz