wvmat.com

The regional seeding criteria is as follows:

1. Head-to-Head

2. Common Opponent

3. Previous Season High School State Placer (Higher Place gets Higher Seed)

4. One season removed from previous season High School State Placer (Higher Place gets Higher Seed)

5. Previous Season Regional Champion

6. Previous Season High School State Qualifier

7. High School State Qualifier one season removed from previous season.

8. If tied and the wrestlers competed head-to-head, most recent win gets Higher Seed

9. Current Season Varsity Win Percentage to Date (*Must have 10 Matches Minimum*)

Criteria 1,2,8 and 9 pertain to the CURRENT season. Criteria 3, 5, and 6 pertain to LAST season. Criteria 4 and 7 pertain to two seasons ago.

To seed THIS season's regional tournaments, 4 out of 9 (44.44%) criteria pertain to this season's action. 5 out of 9 (55.56%) criteria pertain to one or two years ago,

Schools should be required to schedule and wrestle at least 60 to 70% of the schools in their given region. This requirement should provide results that drive more seeding decisions toward criteria 1 and 2. Head-to-head and common opponents.

If a wrestler cannot meet criteria 1 through 8, then he should not be eligible to be seeded in the top 5 in his region.

Having a higher winning percentage over non-regional opponents shouldn't be rewarded.

Bearhugger wrote:The regional seeding criteria is as follows:

1. Head-to-Head

2. Common Opponent

3. Previous Season High School State Placer (Higher Place gets Higher Seed)

4. One season removed from previous season High School State Placer (Higher Place gets Higher Seed)

5. Previous Season Regional Champion

6. Previous Season High School State Qualifier

7. High School State Qualifier one season removed from previous season.

8. If tied and the wrestlers competed head-to-head, most recent win gets Higher Seed

9. Current Season Varsity Win Percentage to Date (*Must have 10 Matches Minimum*)

Criteria 1,2,8 and 9 pertain to the CURRENT season. Criteria 3, 5, and 6 pertain to LAST season. Criteria 4 and 7 pertain to two seasons ago.

To seed THIS season's regional tournaments, 4 out of 9 (44.44%) criteria pertain to this season's action. 5 out of 9 (55.56%) criteria pertain to one or two years ago,

Schools should be required to schedule and wrestle at least 60 to 70% of the schools in their given region. This requirement should provide results that drive more seeding decisions toward criteria 1 and 2. Head-to-head and common opponents.

If a wrestler cannot meet criteria 1 through 8, then he should not be eligible to be seeded in the top 5 in his region.

Having a higher winning percentage over non-regional opponents shouldn't be rewarded.

Man, good question. What if they did schedule in region and it still doesn't help?
hypothetically
Teams A, B, C all faced each other in a season.

Wrestler A Beat, wrestler B, Wrestler C wasn't at the event for sick or injury and wrestler C also misses the regional common opponents for the same illness or injury.

Wrestler C placed at state the previous year but only has a few matches on the season.

how should A, B, C be seeded?
by criteria it is 1C,2A, 3B
Not sure if this is how it should be but it is how it would play out.

Lets take it a step further and say Wrestler b won all of their instate matches but lives in the northern panhandle and has taken their only losses are to Wresters in a different class or in PA. they went 45-5 on the season. Wrestler B is 34-8 on the year and lets take wrestler A to 2-0 on the year. Criteria is still the same C, A, B

Again this sounds like a stretch but it could happen do those win % hold no weight? should there be a limit so for that i disagree with the #9 should be excluded. and i personally think that there should be guardrails placed on the past year(s) criteria (min of 5 matches current season?)

I can see scenarios where current years results should trump past seasons.

and if i was coaching wrestler A, i wouldnt change my schedule at all the following season. I would continue to go after hard competition, chase the losses during the season suffer a lower seed to make the wrestler better.

But hopefully there wouldnt ever be a situation like this.

I once had a wrestler who was 44-1 and his only loss was an OT loss to a Fargo champ who went in to be a Div1 all American. We wrestled him in Philo Ohio but the kid was from Graham. We wrestled almost 100 different teams from 9 states that season. My wrestler was a two time returning champ at WSAZ. We get to the WSAZ seeding meeting (middle school) and there was a huge argument with a coach demanding his 14-0 kid (with 3 forfeits as wins) who had only left their county once ... be seeded first. Eventually, after about 30 minutes ... Coach Archer stepped in and settled it. We were seeded 1. The other kid went loss, win, loss from his two seed and did not place. My guy cruised to the finals and won. Win loss records can be deceiving and level of competition needs to be taken into consideration. PS My guy wrestled all four years of college and was an all American in Div. 2

mscoach106 wrote:

Bearhugger wrote:The regional seeding criteria is as follows:

1. Head-to-Head

2. Common Opponent

3. Previous Season High School State Placer (Higher Place gets Higher Seed)

4. One season removed from previous season High School State Placer (Higher Place gets Higher Seed)

5. Previous Season Regional Champion

6. Previous Season High School State Qualifier

7. High School State Qualifier one season removed from previous season.

8. If tied and the wrestlers competed head-to-head, most recent win gets Higher Seed

9. Current Season Varsity Win Percentage to Date (*Must have 10 Matches Minimum*)

Criteria 1,2,8 and 9 pertain to the CURRENT season. Criteria 3, 5, and 6 pertain to LAST season. Criteria 4 and 7 pertain to two seasons ago.

To seed THIS season's regional tournaments, 4 out of 9 (44.44%) criteria pertain to this season's action. 5 out of 9 (55.56%) criteria pertain to one or two years ago,

Schools should be required to schedule and wrestle at least 60 to 70% of the schools in their given region. This requirement should provide results that drive more seeding decisions toward criteria 1 and 2. Head-to-head and common opponents.

If a wrestler cannot meet criteria 1 through 8, then he should not be eligible to be seeded in the top 5 in his region.

Having a higher winning percentage over non-regional opponents shouldn't be rewarded.

Man, good question. What if they did schedule in region and it still doesn't help?
hypothetically
Teams A, B, C all faced each other in a season.

Wrestler A Beat, wrestler B, Wrestler C wasn't at the event for sick or injury and wrestler C also misses the regional common opponents for the same illness or injury.

Wrestler C placed at state the previous year but only has a few matches on the season.

how should A, B, C be seeded?
by criteria it is 1C,2A, 3B
Not sure if this is how it should be but it is how it would play out.

Lets take it a step further and say Wrestler b won all of their instate matches but lives in the northern panhandle and has taken their only losses are to Wresters in a different class or in PA. they went 45-5 on the season. Wrestler B is 34-8 on the year and lets take wrestler A to 2-0 on the year. Criteria is still the same C, A, B

Again this sounds like a stretch but it could happen do those win % hold no weight? should there be a limit so for that i disagree with the #9 should be excluded. and i personally think that there should be guardrails placed on the past year(s) criteria (min of 5 matches current season?)

I can see scenarios where current years results should trump past seasons.

and if i was coaching wrestler A, i wouldnt change my schedule at all the following season. I would continue to go after hard competition, chase the losses during the season suffer a lower seed to make the wrestler better.

But hopefully there wouldnt ever be a situation like this.

If we always do what we have always done, then we will always get what we have always got.

Do not let "perfect" be the enemy of "better".

I will circle back to this with specifics. Too busy today.

Bearhugger wrote:The regional seeding criteria is as follows:

1. Head-to-Head

2. Common Opponent

3. Previous Season High School State Placer (Higher Place gets Higher Seed)

4. One season removed from previous season High School State Placer (Higher Place gets Higher Seed)

5. Previous Season Regional Champion

6. Previous Season High School State Qualifier

7. High School State Qualifier one season removed from previous season.

8. If tied and the wrestlers competed head-to-head, most recent win gets Higher Seed

9. Current Season Varsity Win Percentage to Date (*Must have 10 Matches Minimum*)

Criteria 1,2,8 and 9 pertain to the CURRENT season. Criteria 3, 5, and 6 pertain to LAST season. Criteria 4 and 7 pertain to two seasons ago.

To seed THIS season's regional tournaments, 4 out of 9 (44.44%) criteria pertain to this season's action. 5 out of 9 (55.56%) criteria pertain to one or two years ago,

Schools should be required to schedule and wrestle at least 60 to 70% of the schools in their given region. This requirement should provide results that drive more seeding decisions toward criteria 1 and 2. Head-to-head and common opponents.

If a wrestler cannot meet criteria 1 through 8, then he should not be eligible to be seeded in the top 5 in his region.

Having a higher winning percentage over non-regional opponents shouldn't be rewarded.

To think a team should be forced to wrestle in their region is awful 60-70% of their schedule is ignorant. A great team should not be punished by having to wrestle that much in lesss talented geographic region.

The regional seeding process in all honesty is pretty solid in my professional opinion.

Give the situation(s) that drive your claim this needs to be done.

BobbyBoatly37 wrote:

Bearhugger wrote:The regional seeding criteria is as follows:

1. Head-to-Head

2. Common Opponent

3. Previous Season High School State Placer (Higher Place gets Higher Seed)

4. One season removed from previous season High School State Placer (Higher Place gets Higher Seed)

5. Previous Season Regional Champion

6. Previous Season High School State Qualifier

7. High School State Qualifier one season removed from previous season.

8. If tied and the wrestlers competed head-to-head, most recent win gets Higher Seed

9. Current Season Varsity Win Percentage to Date (*Must have 10 Matches Minimum*)

Criteria 1,2,8 and 9 pertain to the CURRENT season. Criteria 3, 5, and 6 pertain to LAST season. Criteria 4 and 7 pertain to two seasons ago.

To seed THIS season's regional tournaments, 4 out of 9 (44.44%) criteria pertain to this season's action. 5 out of 9 (55.56%) criteria pertain to one or two years ago,

Schools should be required to schedule and wrestle at least 60 to 70% of the schools in their given region. This requirement should provide results that drive more seeding decisions toward criteria 1 and 2. Head-to-head and common opponents.

If a wrestler cannot meet criteria 1 through 8, then he should not be eligible to be seeded in the top 5 in his region.

Having a higher winning percentage over non-regional opponents shouldn't be rewarded.

To think a team should be forced to wrestle in their region is awful 60-70% of their schedule is ignorant. A great team should not be punished by having to wrestle that much in lesss talented geographic region.

The regional seeding process in all honesty is pretty solid in my professional opinion.

Give the situation(s) that drive your claim this needs to be done.

I said "wrestle at least 60 to 70% of the schools in their given region". I never said wrestle 60 to 70% of a schools schedule against regional teams.

AAA Region 4 has 8 teams. 8 x 70% = 5.6 teams. Over the course of the entire season, wrestle at least 6 of your regional teams in one way of the other. A regional quad, enter some of the big tournaments and get under the same roof as many of your regional opponents, etc.

In the AA/A regions, regions 2 and 4 have the most schools in 17 each. 17 x 70% = 11.9 schools. Again, half of this can be met with two quads.

As I stated a few days ago, I will come back to this.