Printable View
So here is a new formula I am trying
Rank School Total # Guys Team Power
1 Minnesota 127 9 1143
2 Penn State 130 8 1040
3 Oklahoma State 111 8 888
4 Iowa 102 7 714
5 Ohio State 80 8 640
6 Missouri 76 8 608
7 Michigan 84 7 588
8 Nebraska 73 7 511
9 Wyoming 63 7 441
10 Illinois 61 7 427-
V does a great job with his innovative style and fresh eyes on rankings . Of course I disagree with him often yet he is always looking to improve and to try new things . !!
I think what this might reflect ultimately is what team kind of blends the best between individual performances at standard NCAA's with a true dual team?
Idunno..
Russ, you freaking crack me up. Where does the 127 and the 9 come from?
The 127 is their traditional NCAA point calculation based on rankings, the 9 is the number of guys scoring those points. I think it is an interesting way to account for under/over performances at NCAA's. A team with 4 #1 ranked guys might project 100 points, but there is little room for error. A team with 8 guys in the ranked #12 would project significantly lower, but would have the potential to score quite a bit more if they got some AA's. I'd be willing to bet that historically, these rankings would come much closer to actually predicting team finish than the traditional point calculation.
I can understand factoring in the potential to outperform your seeds (and thus PSU's somewhat limitation along that line this year, for example). But how do you actually calculate that? Do you project how high above one's ranking one might place? Is this standard for any ranking (i.e. all 12th ranked guys get a certain amount of points based on the possibility of placing? Or does it look at individual wrestlers and the range they could realistically place (i.e. Apland could only go as high as #6, whereas another wrestler ranked the same at another wrestler, say Steinhaus, could possibly win it all)?
These don't get nearly that detailed. All they do is multiply the predicted tournament points of their ranked wrestlers by the number of wrestlers. That has the "effect" of accounting for many possible overperformances vs. few possible overperformances. Mizzou is a great example of this. Every year, it seems, some team with 3 or 4 highly ranked wrestlers and not much else is projected to score more points than Mizzou's 7-9 middle of the road guys, yet most years Mizzou finishes higher than expected. Why is that? Because more chances to score points is a legimate consideration that the traditional calculation completely discounts. Interesting, as I said.