'97 Hawkeyes vs '24 Nits Head to Head
- Thread starter DeangeloVickers
- Start date
He certainly surprised me, expected him to beat Abas…..really thought he’d loose to Arrington in the blood round…..was happy to be wrong
Look back at the scoring of the top five this year vs the last five years , the top five teams scored less this year than 2018.
Prior to these changes in 2018,2019,2021 top five teams scored more than the top five this year. Last year they scored less than this year's top 5, as did 2022's top 5 teams. However this year was less than 2018-2021. Meaning? The biggest points year in recent memory was when two teams scored over 130 points. In fact if you take OSU's 134.5 points they would beat every other team other than PSU ( and some PSU teams) going back to 2001 Iowa who they would trail by a few points.
To challenge a scoring record you need a very strong team historically without any serious challengers, that will matter more than any scoring rules. You had 2 teams combined for about 275 points six years ago under the old rules. Both of those teams would have won this year by 60-70 points even without the new changes added to their scores. And how many more points would they have had with the updated rules? I'm not sure, but I'll guess a few more. So it appears that the rule change isn't really SUBSTANTIAL compared to the last few years.
Does going from scoring the top six to scoring the top eight meet your standard of a SUBSTANTIAL rule change? They started scoring the top eight in 1979. Did the change lessen Gable's team in 1981 record breaking tally of 129.75 over Kurdelmeier's team in 1976 123.5?
How many eras do you propose to parse out?
I ran numbers back to 2010 and these are the point totals for the top five starting at 2010: 439, 423, 539, 491.5, 450.5, 406.5, 466.5, 543, and from 2018 to now I already laid them out. It seems that strong teams at the top lead to top heavy point totals because the highest totals going back to 2010 were 543 in 2017, in 533 in 2018, 491.5 in 2013, and 484 in 2021. So even with the new rules the top five only accrued 451.5.
It appears the 2-5 teams really didn't benefit from the scoring changes. First because PSU is so dominant that they didn't allow much team scoring. I believe they lost only 9 matches. 2 in the finals, 2 by Davis, one by Kasak, 2 by Nagao, and two by Truax. Their record was 45-9 so they weren't allowing much in the way of team points for their opponents.
No one sets a scoring record without being a great team, a majority of all Americans, wins in the finals, and bonus points. In 2018 PSU went 4-1 in the finals, Hall winning would have put them close to 150, with OSU still in the mid to high 120s. So again, the final thing you'll need is to be head and shoulders above the rest of the pack.
Baseball is the absolute worst example to use since they excluded an entire race until 1946 and didn't fully integrate until the early 60s or so. Then we had them overlook steroids for a decade ( they knew what was going on) until it couldn't be ignored.
So a huge disparity between the 1st place team and the rest of the field is the main contributor to a scoring record?
How did the 97 Hawkeye's set the record?
They only had 2 Big Ten Champs, two weeks earlier. We had a 5&6 seed win title’s. To top it all off, Okie State was expected to win it.
How did the 97 Hawkeye's set the record?
They only had 2 Big Ten Champs, two weeks earlier. We had a 5&6 seed win title’s. To top it all off, Okie State was expected to win it.
So? Iowa was 46.5 points ahead of Oklahoma State, who was favored to win doesn’t matter. They obviously outperformed the field by a great margin that weekend .
The big ten tournament performance is irrelevant to the final outcome at the ncaa championships. At the ncaa tourney they scored 170 with 5 champs, 1 second and two more all Americans . That weekend they were a lot better than the field .
But who cares? It’s like the Super Bowl margin of victory . Winning is the most important goal, not margin of victory . But I get it, since wrestling is an individual sport, the higher individuals end up the higher team score will be. And of course everyone’s goal is to win the national title as an individual.
Appears, appears
Bourbon’s methodology is inherently flawed. Looking at the top team scores of each year is completely irrelevant to whether or not the rule this year increased bonus points. What he should look at is how many bonus points the top guys scored this year vs prior years and then calculate what 4 champs, 2-2nds, 1-3rd,1-5th and 2-R12s would average. Also, compare bonus for 4-1seeds, 2-2seeds, 1-6seed, 1-7seed, 1-9seed and lastly 1-10 seed. Finally, find and compare 2-3 times champs going for their 4th, 3 returning finalists, a 3x top 4 AA, a returning top 6 AA and 3 freshmen that were seeded top 7, with one being undefeated wrestling a full B1G schedule.
Now, after all that has been done find out how many takedowns they had in each match and then calculate what bonus was scored and/or would(not) have been scored.
PSU scored 36 bonus points. Of those 8 were major decisions by 9 points or less and 5 of those were by exactly 8 points. Just changing the takedowns to 2 points in those matches alone damn near guarantees they do not break the record, let alone how it would have affected all the other bonus matches…
Yeah, I like math and sometimes a good debate, but on this one I'm just going with "they beat everyone's a$$ and got the scoring record, end of story". Now, let's figure out how to whoop their ass and get the record back. Go Hawks!
We can go takedowns if you would prefer. In fact, you can ask me "nerd" type questions while I am taking you down!
Nerds is a compliment. They control most of the money in the world. 😉
Depends on context. Sort of like the epic “Fag” episode of South Park!
