photo credit: Caleb Williams Photography
Now that the season is a few weeks old, every team has had the chance to compete. For this reason, almost anyone who has not wrestled yet has been removed from the rankings until they actually compete. Also, these rankings do not account for results that happened last night.
d3wrestle.com Individual Rankings #3 – November 27, 2013
Team Rankings #2
| Rank | Team | Points |
| 1 | Wartburg | 75 |
| 2 | Augsburg | 51 |
| 3 | Cortland | 40 |
| 4 | Messiah | 35 |
| 5 | Coe | 34 |
| 6 | Springfield | 31 |
| 7 | Wisc-Whitewater | 28 |
| 7 | Luther | 28 |
| 9 | Concordia Mn | 23 |
| 10 | Delaware Valley | 20 |
| 10 | Roger Willliams | 20 |
| 10 | Wabash | 20 |
| 13 | Loras | 18 |
| 14 | Wisc-Oshkosh | 17 |
| 15 | Ithaca | 16 |
| 16 | TCNJ | 15 |
| 17 | St. Johns | 14 |
| 17 | Waynesburg | 14 |
| 19 | Elmhurst | 12 |
| 19 | Ursinus | 12 |
| 21 | Cornell | 11 |
| 21 | Johnson and Wales | 11 |
| 23 | Wilkes | 10 |
| 24 | Alma | 9 |
| 24 | Brockport | 9 |
| 24 | Centenary | 9 |
| 24 | Dubuque | 9 |
| 28 | Thiel | 8 |
| 28 | Olivet | 8 |
| 30 | Wisc-Stevens Point | 7 |
| 30 | Wheaton | 7 |
I understand your new rankings criteria. But what do you do when lets say.. #30 beats #19 and beats then handedly?
These are tournament rankings, not dual team rankings. Completely different animal.
Why isn’t Adams from Springfield out? He hasn’t wrestled yet?
“…almost anyone who has not wrestled yet has been removed from the rankings…” He clearly stated that ALMOST everyone who hasn’t competed is removed.
@Scott Olsen, as old125 said, the rankings are not dual meet rankings. They are purely tournament rankings. He explains his ranking system in his first team rankings: https://www.d3wrestle.com/?p=6365
How do you distinguish between one kid who hasn’t wrestled or another kid? If your not going to be bias then you should remove all of the wrestlers.
@rankings.. as stated previosly, he said almost everybody… perhaps he has knowledge of the reason or reasons 4 not removing him as of yet, or perhaps he simply made a mistake & it is an oversite.. there rankings, they mean absolutley nothing at all anyways 🙂
Rankings in of themselves are biased. There is no perfect way to rank anything umnbiasedly. You can only do with what info you have, and as ken said, maybe he has some other knowledge. Another completely plausible explanation is he missed one or two. It happens.
Sadly, this new team ranking criteria seems to be the result of laziness. Might be time for a new website dedicated to our division.
I fail to see how the team ranking is lazy. Look at nearly every division 1 team rankings. The majority are what are called ‘tournament strength’ rankings which are the same concept as this. I would bet my arse that the NWCA coaches poll for D3 is also based on who the coaches think would win the national tournament, not on who would beat who in a dual.
I don’t see why everyone is griping about a ranking anyway. They hold nothing tangible. It doesn’t matter what anyone or any team is ranked. All that matters is how you wrestle.
@ change… b sure 2 send us all a nice greeting card wen u get 2 ur new site plz (lol)… pb, he simply had nothing better 2 do with his time, so he thought he may as well come on this site a gripe & wine like a little girl..(must hve been a slow day at the office) ranking as indicated many times b4 r sinply 4 fun & they really mean nothing at all… wrestling matches as we all well know r won on the wrestling mat 🙂
my guess would b that his team didnt get the ranking he would have liked, so hes on here 2 stir the pot a little… go take ur football & leave the playing field now ok change… i for one think the people on here do a wonderful job at keeping us informed of wats going on & put in a boat load of time as well 🙂
Comments are closed.