Search This Blog

Wednesday, January 18, 2012

Richland Coaches Duals

I'm now allowed to release the pools for the Richland Coaches Duals, which will feature 28 teams and eight matches for each squad over the two-day event.
Here's the breakdown:

Pool A
Cambridge Springs
Moshannon Valley
Richland
Greater Johnstown
Berlin Brothersvalley
Glendale
Tussey Mountain

Pool B
Blairsville
Claysburg-Kimmel
Conemaugh Township
Central
Shade
Northern Cambria
Elderton

Pool C
West Branch
Somerset
Kittanning
Berwick
Central Cambria
Bellwood-Antis
United

Pool D
Chestnut Ridge
Huntingdon
Dallas
Tyrone
Marion Center
Jamestown
Penn Cambria

Analysis: No surprise that the host school gets the weakest pool, but the discrepancies seem pretty dramatic this year. I actually think that Pool D is somewhat weak as well. Pools B and C are loaded, though. Somerset, which is the second-place team in Pool C might end up winning the whole thing. West Branch should be pretty strong. Kittanning was a AAA school until last year and Berwick still is. That doesn't guarantee a better squad, but it does provide a better chance for a full lineup, which plays a big role in success in this event.
Pool B is pretty strong as well. Blairsville is pretty solid at every weight while Claysburg-Kimmel has some outstanding individuals. Conemaugh Township is much improved and would likely finish higher in Pool A.
I haven't seen Huntingdon this year, but the Bearcats seem to have lost a lot from the well-balanced squad that won last year's title. I would think Chestnut Ridge would be the definite favorite, though.
As much as I've criticized Pool A, I don't really know too much about Moshannon Valley and Cambridge Springs. Maybe they're both better than I thought and this will be more difficult than anticipated. I do know that Greater Johnstown and Berlin Brothersvalley were pretty solid teams before injuries and other problems  ravaged their lineups.
No matter how it all shakes out, there should be some interesting matchups, and you can get updates throughout the weekend in a live chat that I'll be hosting at The Tribune-Democrat's website.


2 comments:

  1. If I were a coach at this event I'd be irate at the seedings. It shouldn't be that hard to reasonably rank teams 1-32, split the top 4, then 2nd 4 allocate to minimize previous/scheduled dual meet matchups, then next 4 and continue down the line.

    Some glaring issues, imo:

    A) Somerset should be the top seed overall, not the 2nd seed within a pool.
    B) Mo Valley has blowout losses to Blairsville (55-18), West Branch(45-27) and Berwick (49-24). Yet they get a 2nd seed while Berwick is a 4th seed?
    C) Cambridge Springs is 10-4, but most of the wins have been when facing weak competition. 40+ point losses when facing Greenville and Brookville. imo they should probably be a 3rd seed.
    D) The home squad just happens to be the beneficiary of a lot of these issues. If I were a wrestler/coach/booster @ Richland I'd be embarassed by how this was done.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Good points, Knopsnyder and Odoyel....but Richland does this type of stuff every year with this tournament--why do these teams keep coming back?? Try as they may, however, it looks like their misguided and questionable efforts aren't enough to garner the success Richland is looking for.

    ReplyDelete