qualifiers and brackets

[J. Carl]

Someone in the thread mentioned "separating" conference opponents for the first round. they changed it after the fiasco in Detroit when the new programmers, using the program they had for Division II, separated conference foes for TWO rounds, giving the Big Ten a huge edge. Instead of going back to one round of separation, they eliminated it.
Personally, I really liked the one round of separation. Would rather see everyone wrestle one match for sure against someone from a different region instead of having in-conference matchups with people you've already wrestled at least once -- and sometimes even up to three or four previous meetings.

 

[CB4OSUWrestling]

I agree one round of separation for conference opponents is the way to go.

 

[oberebo]

I also think one round of separation would be good however even if it had not been changed since the Big 12 is not an AQ
conference this rule might not have applied to Big 12 wrestlers. All of the Big 12 wrestlers are "at large" and the conference tournament was not a factor.

























Q

 

[SetonHallPirate]

Originally posted by J. Carl:
Someone in the thread mentioned "separating" conference opponents for the first round. they changed it after the fiasco in Detroit when the new programmers, using the program they had for Division II, separated conference foes for TWO rounds, giving the Big Ten a huge edge. Instead of going back to one round of separation, they eliminated it.
Personally, I really liked the one round of separation. Would rather see everyone wrestle one match for sure against someone from a different region instead of having in-conference matchups with people you've already wrestled at least once -- and sometimes even up to three or four previous meetings.

Actually, they only got rid of the separation last year, and it was part of the expansion of the seeding to 16. They also made it so that seeded wrestlers could not get drawn into a pigtail.