Whenever I look at the rankings it seems like people mix the two, and there really isn't any consensus as to what the criteria is. The things that make a good dual team should be recognized because it highlights healthy programs, with depth and consistency. It highlights coaching because it's almost certain that kids have been developed to fill holes in the lineup. Nobody really gets a full lineup developed through youth programs in Connecticut. Even Danbury fills out the top end of their lineup with kids who start as freshmen. Then you have the teams that have some hammers that score no matter the competition level. Why not have two Top Ten or Top Twenty Ranks? It could be something where you vote on each one every two weeks so we stagger it. Maybe it's even done off of actual data instead of a vote?
Thoughts?
wow, great, I was wondering how to cure acne naturally. and found your site by google, learned a lot, now i’m a bit clear. I’ve bookmark your site and also add rss. keep us updated. Super Affiliate System
Gangaur Realtech is a professionally managed organisation specializing in real estate services where integrated services are provided by professionals to its clients seeking increased value by owning, occupying or investing in real estate. Super Affiliate System
This website is remarkable information and facts it's really excellent Super Affiliate System
Much thanks for composing such an intriguing article on this point. This has truly made me think and I plan to peruse more Super Affiliate System
Personally I think it's a mix. High school coaches are doing the bulk of the work in-season. There are rules that limit club practices through that period. I'm not so naive that I think there aren't kids circumventing them, but if there are viable practice partners in a room I'm guessing the hammers will work out there. Club coaches were fed an athlete from a local program, the local program takes them part of the way, the club program hones talent and technique, the high school coach works a lot of the mental game with all the competitions, and some technical (they have a much broader talent spectrum to deal with). If you have a kid that finds success in high school who isn't a product of the youth and club programs, then give credit where credit is due. Coach and kid.
I think Ricky Shook has a full team working out at the school. Same with Jason Shaughnessy. All of these guys still have to coach the corner, and they are skilled coaches. Their kids are mentally prepared. I've seen coaches try to work from the corner with kids they don't really know, and that usually manifests in odd results and a lack of confidence by the wrestler. Are there a few programs balanced a different way....I'm sure. Just have to look at it case by case.
This brings up a fascinating issue, how much of a wrestler's success should be credited to their HS coaches versus their club coaches?
Is that any different than every other program in the state? Do you discount Warde and Shaughnessy because of John Knapp? Do you minimize Danbury because of John Degal? Two kids who won championships at M's aren't products of those systems. I'd say some respect is due there. Certainly not the blatant disrespect you're suggesting.
Pretty sure LiCastri has more respect for his high school coach than you do apparently.
Umm no I think they need to buy either I Nick Weyer, Keith Lynch, Grant Paswell, or John Degal a thank you and a cigar, not the Barlow coach.
In the end I think it's funny that Barlow finished as the second best CT team at both Eastern Regionals and New Englands without their full squad at either, and yet they are somehow less respected than a team that can fill every weight class. Personally, I find it pretty impressive that a non-traditional wrestling school did that. Looks like they have three kids who wrestled youth, and two who started wrestling in high school, they win 4 weight classes in M's and send 4 kids to New Englands after losing a kid who lost blood round at Opens 2019, and went 4-2 at Eastern Regionals to illness.
Someone should be buying the coach a cigar. That's a pretty damn consistent result at the highest competitions.
i agree with the dual rankings but think like many statistics, the further you go from the top, the more likely you will see larger swings in outcome. for instance this year, in every poll or ranking, danbury is 1st. the two rankings above and ctonline agree. no degree of uncertainty. then you get to #2 and you get three different teams, warde, b.e. and xavier. by the time you get to #5, there are 3 again. point here is, it's not scientific and is subject to opinion. when it comes to polling (asking coaches) which is unlike numerical ranking which simply looks at an equation(s). to that point - greenwich, staples, waterford, montville, and gilbert all got votes by coaches on ctwrestling's final rankings yet failed to make either the numerical list or the real list above, which casts fault in this particular method (opinion poll) of ranking. The best method would be numerical and the most accurate would be the top 3-5 teams. after that, too many variables.
Below is the results based on the Data compared to the actual Open Results. Thanks for putting this together @mophie.
Following this point system makes it easier for @abdoshaban , way less time consuming and subjective. I think if he is going to do two rankings, one would be based off of his personal rankings like in the past, and the other off of this point system
Team Total Pts REAL RESULT
1. Danbury Danbury
2. Warde Xavier
3. Xavier Warde
3. Trumbull Bristol Eastern
4. New Canaan Trumbull
5. BE New Canaan
6. Wethersfield Simsbury
7. Middletown Southington
7. Simsbury Joel Barlow
7. Avon Suffield/Windsor Locks
8. Killingly Northwestern
8. New London Killingly
8. Ellis tech Wethersfield
9. East haven Middletown
9. Southington Foran
9. Shelton Nonnewaug
10. Barlow Ellis Tech
10. Berlin South Windsor
10. Tolland Westhill
10. Immaculat Ledyard
Wasn't too far off. Was a pretty good modeling with so so data over 160. Only real miss was Suffield instead of Avon. Tolland did what they were projected.....one man team won his bracket. Barlow and Immaculate are combined. Nonnewaug and Northwestern were underrated as well.
when it comes to ranking a dual team, there should be something said about difficulty of schedule. an easy schedule can often be assessed by individuals who have big records that don't produce at states and especially not at the open. the record gets them a high seed but they lose in 1/4s. i noticed it mostly with the smaller schools but it happens at all the classes. while i understand that the team can gain momentum from a win throughout the season, shutting out teams and wrestling a soft team doesn't build much of a program. and the season usually ends a week or two sooner.
I’d be down to make 2 team polls next year top 15, dual and tournament
3 of the top ten teams at Opens and 6 of the top twenty teams at Opens were not ranked in the ConnWrestling Top 20 Rankings
I think a separate Poll/Rankings on what people think the top 10 or 20 teams in the state are for tournament performance is a great idea especially since there is not a dual tournament in CT.
New Canaan 6 at Open and NR in poll;
Joel Barlow 9 at Open and NR in poll;
Glastonbury 8 at Open NR in poll;
Northwestern 11 at Open and NR in poll;
Nonnewaug 16 at Open and NR in poll
Ellis Teck 17 at Open and NR in poll
State Open Team results –1. Danbury 158, 2. Xavier 109, 3. Fairfield Warde 103, 4. Bristol Eastern 89, 5. Trumbull 78½, 6. New Canaan 71, 7. Simsbury 70, 8. Southington 69, 9. Joel Barlow and Suffield/Windsor Locks 63, 11. Northwestern 62, 12. Killingly and Wethersfield 60, 14. Middletown 49, 15. Foran 47½, 16. Nonnewaug 44, 17. Ellis Tech 43, 18. South Windsor and Westhill 39; 20. Ledyard, Shelton, Staples 37; 23. Avon 36, 24. Glastonbury and New Haven 35, 26. Gilbert and Hall 32, 28. New Milford 31½, 29. New London 31, 30. Norwalk 30½, 31. Branford 30, 32. Tolland 29, 33. Manchester 28, 34. Griswold and Platt High 27, 36. Berlin 25, 37. Jonathan Law 24, 38. Haddam-Killingworth and Montville 20, 40. Waterford 19½, 41. Canton and Bristol Central 19, 43. Brien McMahon and New Fairfield 18, 45. Newtown and East Hartford 17; 47. Greenwich and Ridgefield 16, 49. Lyman Memorial/Windham Tech and Plainville 14, 51. Newington 13, 52. Brookfield 12, 53. East Catholic 11½, 54. Amity, East Hampton and New Britain 11; 57. Abbot Tech and Maloney 10; 59. Bacon Academy, Fairfield Prep and Hand 8; 62. NFA, Oxford, Windham High 7; 65. Bethel, East Haven, Enfield and Stafford 6; 70. E.O. Smith, East Windsor, Granby, Guilford, Masuk, Morgan, RHAM and Valley Regional 4; 78. Portland 3, 79. Wilton 2; 80. Conard 2
ConnWrestling Top 20 Poll 1 Danbury LL 2 Fairfield Warde LL 3 Simsbury L 5 4 Bristol Eastern L 3 5 Southington LL 4 6 Middletown L 7 Trumbull LL 8 Xavier L 9 Killingly M 12 10 Foran M 9 11 Avon M 10 12 East Haven M 11 13 Ledyard M 14 Guilford M 15 Daniel Hand L 16 Montville S 17 Waterford M 18 Windham S 19 Wethersfield L 20 Greenwich
I noticed the top 10 really didnt get much in the way of updates....maybe we can have dual polls next year updated bi-weekly, or monthly, one for Dual Teams, and the other for Tournament Teams.
New York does the same thing, and Xavier, Fairfield Prep, and like schools would not be in the same leagues as public schools (Prep Schools, and Catholic schools have their own conferences to keep the playing field level.)
A state dual meet should be a no brainer.
It would be cool if CT did a State Dual tournament like Mass does, maybe the week before the county tournaments... for this year, i think the top 5/6 from the Open are also the top 5/6 for duals. With the exception of New Canaan.
Danbury is the clear #1 for both tournaments and duals. They had dual wins over Warde, Trumbull and Xavier.
2-6 on the other hand would probably be a different result 10/10 times
Warde,Trumbull,Simsbury,Southington, Xavier, BE would all battle it out for 2nd and that would be cool to see.
This is always discussed for NCAA rankings on flo and themat.com, but in the end all that really is recognized by many is the March national tournament, so they never do a separate dual ranking. I hate to say it but rankings are really only good for one thing.. conversions on this forum. Rankings play no part in state seeding and with no dual state tournament, dual rankings are not needed.
take a team with a full line up with decent wrestlers against a team with 2 or 3 hammers with holes in the line up , the full team wins the dual, now the 2 same teams are represented at a national tournament that the individual had to qualify for those 3 hammers and say 2 other decent wrestlers go far in the tournament but that dual team winner only had 3 decent guys but the lineup was full but only 3 guys made the Nationals and didn’t go that far. So there should be 2 rankings