***NCAA Allocations (Thursday, 2/23)***

[Cytasticlone]

Hopefully this doesn't confuse anyone about this year, but I wanted to compare allocations.

This year(2023):

NCAA allocation numbers, along with final CR and RPI, are scheduled to be announced on Thursday, Feb. 23.

CONF	125	133	141	149	157	165	174	184	197	285	TOTAL
ACC	2	3	4	4	3	3	3	5	4	3	34
Big 12	6	5	7	7	7	8	6	4	6	8	64
Big Ten	9	9	9	9	10	8	7	9	9	9	88
EIWA	6	5	5	2	3	5	4	4	5	6	45
MAC	2	1	2	5	4	1	4	2	1	1	23
Pac-12	3	3	1	1	1	2	2	1	3	1	18
SoCon	1	2	1	1	1	1	2	1	1	1	12
At-Large	4	5	4	4	4	5	5	7	4	4	46

All conference championships are being conducted on the weekend of March 3-5.

NCAA At-Large qualifiers will be announced March 7 or 8.

NCAA seeds and brackets will be announced on the evening of March 8.

From last years thread(2022):

All of these are scheduled to come out sometime today (Thursday 2/24).

Once released, it should be fairly easy to figure out who earned spots for the conference, and how much work the others will have to do to steal those spots.

The names we see (or don't see) in the rankings may also answer questions about some lineups for Tulsa (Schoenfelder/Runyon and Roberts/Moore, for example).

CONF	125	133	141	149	157	165	174	184	197	285	TOT
ACC	3	5	4	4	5	3	4	5	3	3	39
Big 12	6	6	7	4	6	4	8	4	7	6	58
Big Ten	10	10	7	7	7	7	8	12	11	9	88
EIWA	4	2	4	4	5	7	4	3	5	4	42
MAC	1	1	3	5	2	3	2	2	1	2	22
Pac-12	3	3	2	3	2	3	2	2	1	2	23
SoCon	2	2	1	2	1	2	1	1	1	2	15
At-Large	4	4	5	4	5	4	4	4	4	5	43

BigXII is up 6 total allocations this year. BIG stays pat at 88. At Large is up 3.

Edit: As always thanks to Shadow for putting these together. It's nice to have the info available and catered to us ISU fans.

 

[buf87]

Also of note, Teske and Foley of MSU didn't get an allocation at 133 for Big 10

Teske - NR in CR, NR in RPI, 6-2 record
Foley - 19 in CR, 30 in RPI, 11-7 record

Interesting that Teske isn't ranked

Sounds like Iowa didn’t submit a 133 pounder. Strange!!

 

[CyCloneRastlinG]

Also of note, Teske and Foley of MSU didn't get an allocation at 133 for Big 10

Teske - NR in CR, NR in RPI, 6-2 record
Foley - 19 in CR, 30 in RPI, 11-7 record

Interesting that Teske isn't ranked

It’s kind of funny and kind of sad that guys play more football games in a season now than wrestlers are wrestling.

 

[theshadow]

149 Update (also in OP):
Pac-12 now with 2 bids, ACC down to 3

 

[theshadow]

I am curious how many of the weights in the SoCon and Pac 12 were earned and not just given to the champion? I assume the Pac12 probably earned at the one at almost every weight with ASU, Oregon State and Stanford there. The So Con should break up and go to MAC or Pac 12 or a combination.

If Pirate's numbers are to be believed, all of the allocated spots were earned except MAC 133 and SoCon 141.

And I say "if" because he lists 6 Big 12 guys at 133 (5 spots). Henson is the odd man out.

 

[TheJackWePack5]

We should get Big 12 seeding beginning of next week?

 

[BirdOfWar]

Sounds like Iowa didn’t submit a 133 pounder. Strange!!

I don't think I understand how all this works very well so what do you mean they didn't submit a anyone at 133?

 

[theshadow]

I don't think I understand how all this works very well so what do you mean they didn't submit a anyone at 133?

Coaches submit their lineup for rankings (1 per weight -- no "or" allowed). Only wrestlers on the submitted list can be put in CR and RPI.

 

[matclone]

Does that just mean Teske, for example, didn't get a coaches ranking, but that he could still get in by tourney finish or at-large?

 

[buf87]

I don't think I understand how all this works very well so what do you mean they didn't submit a anyone at 133?

correct. If they submitted Teske and Teske gets an allocation and doesn't wrestle in the Big 10 tournament, the allocation goes back in the pool of at large bids. So nothing would of been hurt.

 

[Cytasticlone]

Coaches submit their lineup for rankings (1 per weight -- no "or" allowed). Only wrestlers on the submitted list can be put in CR and RPI.

Alright, that part makes sense. Now, can anyone explain the galaxy brain thinking of just not submitting an entry that possibly gets your conference an allocation? Are t&j trying to F someone over for some perceived slight? I'm probably missing the obvious, but it seems like you would always submit it if there's a chance.

Edit: I see Buf's reply now. Should have waited a bit longer before putting my uneducated nonsense in the thread. Carry on.

 

[buf87]

@theshadow, since no one was entered at 133 for Iowa, are they even able to get an at large bid if they don't steal one?

 

[theshadow]

@theshadow, since no one was entered at 133 for Iowa, are they even able to get an at large bid if they don't steal one?

It should be treated the same as a coach subbing in a different wrestler.

Wrestlers that meet two or more of the at-large consideration standards will be eligible for at-large selection.

Minimum standards include:
.700 overall winning percentage
.700 Division I winning percentage at the weight class
Top 33 RPI (taken after the qualifying tournaments)
Top 33 Coaches Ranking (Taken after the qualifying tournament)
One win against a wrestler who qualified for the National Tournament
Qualifying event placement one below AQ.

 

[buf87]

so
Teske is 6-2, 75% win %age, no RPI, but probably would of been ranking and earn an allocation

Schiever is 7-6, so no win %age, might get coaches ranking, but 2 matches short of an RPI

Sounds like Schiever could of used the Last Chance Open and Teske probably would of got a berth if entered,

Doesn't make any sense, if my numbers are correct

 

[theshadow]

We should get Big 12 seeding beginning of next week?

Patience, grasshopper.

 

[TheJackWePack5]

Patience, grasshopper.

Ya’ll get any of them seeds

 

[buf87]

At 157, Flo has Hornfeck in for WVU, the projection show that Dowling of WVU earned an allocation. If this is true and Hornfeck wrestles, the Big 12 will lose 1 allocation at 157 and it will go into the at large pool

 

[theshadow]

This means 6 qualifiers at 157, and 5 in at the at-large pool.

 

[theshadow]

Upon further review (by the NCAA), the Big 12 will have 6 qualifiers at 133, not 5. This reduces the at-large pool from 5 to 4.

The change was very quiet -- only an update to the original press release from last week, as far as I can see. This would mean that Henson from OU was indeed a bid earner.

 

[CyCloneRastlinG]

Upon further review (by the NCAA), the Big 12 will have 6 qualifiers at 133, not 5. This reduces the at-large pool from 5 to 4.

The change was very quiet -- only an update to the original press release from last week, as far as I can see. This would mean that Henson from OU was indeed a bid earner.

That’s great news for us