| let's talk playoffs | |
|
|
Author | Message |
---|
LSO
Number of posts : 240 Age : 41 Location : Chesterfield, SC Registration date : 2008-08-02
| Subject: let's talk playoffs Wed 28 Jan - 14:13 | |
| AA Lowerstate
The Lowerstate has a log jam with winning percentages and few common opponents. Let's look at the top seeds.
Loris is the obvious #1 seed. They are the returning champs as well and are hoisting a 96% winning percentage.
The number two spot gets very interesting and is very important. Edisto has an 86% winning percentage and to the BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE has the next highest winning percentage...however Hanahan has a head-to-head and will get the nudge to the #2 spot with Edisto the #3 position. Hanahan seems to be peaking and looks strong heading into the post-season.
Timberland has an 82% winning percentage and on paper should be the #4 but a questionable strength of schedule could push them as low as #7 behind Cheraw and Gilbert
Cheraw and Gilbert are virtually identical with at 79%. Cheraw has 8 losses...Chesterfield (2X), Loris, Sumter, South Pointe and several OOS's. These two teams could meet in the quarters with the winner a shot at Loris!!!
Gilbert, however, could be in the upperstate this season and could throw a monkey wrench into the upperstate duals.
AA Upperstate
The two frontrunners (Abbeville and Woodruff) have split and seem to be both primed for one more showdown. Woodruff (84%) has a slight edge over Abbeville (83%). Both have some tough losses to solid programs. Abbeville, other than their close loss to Woodruff, has avenged a loss against BHP and has only surrendered losses to Hillcrest and Chesterfield. Woodruff lost a couple early matches due to a late football season. Nonetheless, I forsee Abbeville travelling to Woodruff for an intense match....assuming Gilbert stays in the lowerstate.
From the information that I have received, Liberty will finish up with a 65% winning percentage. I am unsure of whether they have any head-to-head losses. They have a 21-12 dual record with 6 of the losses coming to larger schools at the Red Raider Rumble...take away that weekend and they seem fairly strong.
Palmetto and Broome even at 54% but Palmetto has the head-to-head so they should get the nod at the #4 spot.
There is a significant drop off in regards to winning percentaage after the two top teams, however, that does not mean these teams cannot compete. Broome entered the playoffs last season with a marginal record and nearly ended up at Ridgeview HS for a shot at gold. Broome has 10 dual losses but examine the teams: Boiling Spring, Woodruff (2X), Palmetto, Bluffton, Riverside, Chesterfield, Dobyns-Bennet)...pretty solid losses. Broome is my darkhorse team...every year I ride them off and they come back and punch me in the face...I am sticking with them this year. They could meet Palmetto in the quarters with a chance at Abbeville or cross-county rival Woodruff!!
Again...these are rough mock playoff scenarios intended to create input. This is not the true playoff picture. | |
|
| |
CU
Number of posts : 54 Location : Clemson Registration date : 2009-01-22
| Subject: Re: let's talk playoffs Fri 30 Jan - 3:00 | |
| Liberty lost a match to Walhalla in the Skyline duals that will cost them in seeding. I know very little about Palmetto cause I never seem to be able to catch their matches and cannot provide input between them and Broome. | |
|
| |
Broomefa Guest
| Subject: playoffs Fri 30 Jan - 16:17 | |
| Brome won the head to head with Palmetto on Wednesday night with a 40.5 to 28.5 win in the region tournament. That is the region's consitition to break ties. The teams split during the conference schedule. So Broome should have the advantage over Palmetto in the seeding meeting with all things considered. |
|
| |
Guest Guest
| Subject: Playoffs Fri 30 Jan - 20:37 | |
| Walhalla SHOULD get the #3 upperstate seed over Liberty. Winning percentage is about identical to Liberty's. Walhalla wrestled a solid schedule stepping into NC twice, once in the Enka duals - tough tourney. I think they went 3-2. Walhalla beat Liberty twice head to head and fared better than the devils in the Red Raider duals. They finished 2nd in the skyline and Liberty finished tied for third I believe. It won't much matter tho cause Abbeville or Woodruff will be advancing to state. |
|
| |
hallmana Guest
| Subject: Re: let's talk playoffs Sat 31 Jan - 20:52 | |
| Does the seeding go based on winning pct??? Why not just have the top 2 teams in each region make the playoffs and then seed those teams accordingly. Gilbert is in the upperstate, not lowerstate.
What seed would you think that Cane Bay will get??? |
|
| |
NSwrestler(retired)
Number of posts : 230 Age : 34 Location : Clemson, SC (formerly of Ninety Six) Registration date : 2009-01-20
| Subject: Re: let's talk playoffs Mon 2 Feb - 2:45 | |
| hallmana, there are some regions with only one or 2 wrestling teams and some of those teams dont deserve to advance to the playoffs just for being defacto region champs. there are also regions like the skyline where as many as 4 or 5 teams may deserve playoff berths in a given year. | |
|
| |
justafan Guest
| Subject: playoff pairings Mon 2 Feb - 14:31 | |
| How in the world did Palmetto get the 6th seed over Broome? Broome finished ahead of them in the region. I wonder.......... |
|
| |
jfk Guest
| Subject: Re: let's talk playoffs Mon 2 Feb - 19:47 | |
| who cares, abbeville will lose to either of them |
|
| |
morris
Number of posts : 12 Location : loris Registration date : 2009-01-23
| Subject: Re: let's talk playoffs Mon 2 Feb - 23:08 | |
| before this all kick off who do u think will win 2a | |
|
| |
lion Guest
| Subject: Re: let's talk playoffs Mon 2 Feb - 23:41 | |
| u awreddy no bout hoo gone win dis hole thang babi!!!!! da loris lions all da way!!! we gone beet dem by 69 pts. n if we dont we gone use us bad gramer 2 kill dey soul! we da kings of da jungul!!!! cheeeeeeeeeeeeaaaaaaaaaa!!!!!!!!!!!!!! |
|
| |
guest Guest
| Subject: Re: let's talk playoffs Tue 3 Feb - 0:00 | |
| palmetto got the better seed then broome cause we beat them by points the second time and they won by criteria so thats why cause were just better. |
|
| |
hmmmm Guest
| Subject: playoffs Tue 3 Feb - 13:01 | |
| If Palmetto is so much better, why did Broome have 6 Region Champions to Palmetto's 3? Also when they wrestled were'nt the two Woodard brothers out due to attending a memorial service for thier sister and her 3 children tragicaly lost in a fire? I hope they get to wrestle again. I think that Broome has something for them! Come on Palmetto guest, reply to this! |
|
| |
Coach St Guest
| Subject: Re: let's talk playoffs Tue 3 Feb - 14:38 | |
| Here is the criteria that was used:
1. Head to Head 2. Overall winning percentage 3. Common Opponents 4. 2A record 5. point differential between teams involved (this is what determined the #1 and #2 seed in upper state) |
|
| |
NSwrestler(retired)
Number of posts : 230 Age : 34 Location : Clemson, SC (formerly of Ninety Six) Registration date : 2009-01-20
| Subject: Re: let's talk playoffs Tue 3 Feb - 16:49 | |
| aaaand the s#$% talking begins | |
|
| |
Shake 'n Guest
| Subject: Re: let's talk playoffs Tue 3 Feb - 17:11 | |
| All this talk about Broome and first things first they got to get by Emerald. Don't under estimate. |
|
| |
Justafan Guest
| Subject: playoffs Tue 3 Feb - 18:26 | |
| You are absolutely right! First things first in the playoffs! Many good teams have been beat looking ahead to lesser seeds. Remember 96 and the perfect 29-0 record before falling to Broome at home last year? |
|
| |
NSwrestler(retired)
Number of posts : 230 Age : 34 Location : Clemson, SC (formerly of Ninety Six) Registration date : 2009-01-20
| Subject: Re: let's talk playoffs Tue 3 Feb - 20:09 | |
| justafan, I'd rather not remember that | |
|
| |
justafan Guest
| Subject: playoffs Tue 3 Feb - 22:52 | |
| It was one of the best matches that I have ever seen. I mean, even in defeat, you had to be proud to be a part of that one! |
|
| |
NSwrestler(retired)
Number of posts : 230 Age : 34 Location : Clemson, SC (formerly of Ninety Six) Registration date : 2009-01-20
| Subject: Re: let's talk playoffs Tue 3 Feb - 23:54 | |
| it was a great match, but I wrestled poorly, and no matter how good of a match, it still stings | |
|
| |
Sponsored content
| Subject: Re: let's talk playoffs | |
| |
|
| |
| let's talk playoffs | |
|