Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by Plasmodium

  1. Fortune is the only one still going.
  2. Taylor would then be 5-1-2-1, assuming no surprises.
  3. If you think you didn't insult me, read your own posts. At least you have a definite opinion. This distinguishes you from pa- fan. He will not say anything. I did not say dake is better than jb, I said jb is better. I do not know enough about Stephen Neal,s career to rank him on any list.I also said Smith is better than than jb. I am not judging based solely on NCAA results, because there is more information available. These comparisons are all opinions. When trying to compare people from different years, you have to use some criteria to separate them. jb dominated everyone in his best years. Others have done that, but DT did not. JB quickly followed that up with a world title. This is one criteria that separates him from others, including dt. As mentioned earlier, maybe howe, dsj and Taylor will wind up in the same bracket. DT blows through it and follows that up with a world title. Then the list might change. Given your criteria, I wouldn't argue with your lists. Let me give you a hypothetical now. Suppose DT has to wrestle at 165 as a freshman and winds up 5th. How does your list change?
  4. This is a dead end. I don't know enough about Stephen Neal. I'm not interested enough to rank the others. I don't have a bcs type point system, but if I did it would be weighted towards the better years in a big way. Bottom line - Burroughs finishes college comfortably ahead of Taylor and Bubba as a senior proved himself demonstrably ahead of Taylor as a freshman. Those were my original points and I provided the rationale for them. What I got in return was zero rationale and insults from the peanut gallery (you) and pa fan. His brilliant logic? "You can't use post graduate results to evaluate how good someone was. You just can't. I don't know how else to tell you!" :lol:
  5. LOL Was the Baron ever a world champion? Perhaps he could add something to this discussion.
  6. olddirty, My assumption is that many, if not most, coaches of world champions are not world champions themselves. Aren't they telling their athletes how to be a world champion?
  7. What?? Rank certain people? I rank Burroughs over DT. The rationale is solid.
  8. They don't have anything to do with it. At any rate, I gave an opinion about Dake a long time ago. I rate Smith higher than Burroughs.
  9. Tsargush will be 26 on September 1, isn't that to old?
  10. I sound foolish? This is a simple discussion that has nothing to do with Dake or smith or anyone else. Further, there is no exact formula in comparing people from different years let alone different decades. Comparisons among DT, JB, JS and KD are different subjects. You are correct that DT could pull some real surprises in the next year, in fact you could have copied and pasted one of my posts on that subject. I think Pa-Fan can have enough of a spine to actually type an answer to a simple question. He is certain enough of himself to insult me for a week, I see no reason why he can't answer the question.
  11. Why would my criteria put Burroughs above Smith?
  12. I have also never said that jb > js, so don't assume. he is not part of the discussion.
  13. I have not said dake is better than jb. I clearly set the question as yes/no when I asked it.
  14. Since I made the question yes/no, obviously you are wrong.
  15. Yes and no are the only possible answers to a yes/no question. Providing a different answer means that you haven't answered the question.
  16. Does his answer need more 0's or 1's? LOL the beauty of the binary question is he only needs a single bit to answer it. 1 for yes, 0 for no.
  17. You still haven't answered it. 'Maybe' is not an answer to a binary question.
  18. I forget - what are the rules for someone sitting out the challenge tournament?
  19. Yes, you have been clear on what your reasoning is - and it is not only flawed, but also biased. Yes, you are comparing how good they (JB and DT) were at their best, by bringing up the point that JB won a world title a few months after college and DT didnt. You did this because you stated that their overall career college statistics and accomplishments didnt matter as much as how high a level they were at during their peak at graduation. Fine, if you want to use that line of argument - I present Kyle Dake and John smith. Dake, same as Taylor, was not on the level you give Burroughs - yet you say Dake is the better college wrestler while Taylor is not. Smith is above the level you give Burroughs, yet you say Burroughs is the better college wrestler than Smith. You pick and choose when you want to use your criteria that you "put more stock into" - and when presented with other examples of why it simply does not work - you dump it and say it is "off topic". No, sir. Im sorry - but again, you cannot do that and be logical at the same time. Your position is extremely illogical and inconsistent. In fact, it cannot be any more illogical or inconsistent...and it becomes dishonest when you continue to evade the implications by stating that you can pick and choose which criterion is most important whenever you want, and throw it out whenever you want. You can not do that and have a logically consistent and coherent argument. It is biased and dishonest, period. You continue to be evasive and avoid addressing it - but it does not go away. Ill map it out more clearly, since maybe jumbled up in paragraph form is tough to see. Comparing who was the better collegiate wrestler at the peak of their NCAA career... **I know this is repetative, but I want to keep hammering it in so you can no longer avoid it... Three examples: 1) JB is better than DT because he was able to win a World Title 3 months after graduation, and Taylor cannot do that. 2) Dake is better than JB, in spite of the fact that, like DT, he is not able to win a World Title 3 months after graduation. 3) JB is better than John Smith, in spite of the fact that Smith won two World Title while still in college, and it took Burroughs until after college to get to that level. This is the single most inconsistent argument I've ever seen posted on these boards. The more you attempt to state that it is consistent, the more dishonest it becomes on top of the inconsistency. Ask yourself this question: Is the 3/14 DT better than 3/11 Burroughs? Share it with the board. Typing the answer "NO" will be very liberating for you.
  20. Stay on topic. Kyle Dake has nothing to with this discussion. He is a different person with different credentials. I have been clear what my reasoning is. I am comparing how good they are when at their best. I put more stock into how he performed as a developed wrestler than how he performed as a developing wrestler. Frankly, I put zero stock in the latter. That is neither illogical or dishonest. You don't agree, fair enough. Have the courage to answer the same yes/no question that I did and we'll move on to Bubba.
  21. This is a different topic, I don't want PA-Fan to confuse the two.
  22. It's not about what you are interested in. It is about the criteria and reasoning you use to put Burroughs (as a college wrestler) ahead of Taylor (as a college wrestler). I showed you, that using the same criteria, Burroughs must be a better college wrestler than Dake, because Dake (like you pointed out of Taylor) was not able to win a world title a few months after graduating. Further than that, again using your criteria of evaluation, John Smith must be a better college wrestler than Burroughs (who is better than Taylor and Dake) because he won TWO world titles while still in college, and it took Burroughs a few months after he graduated. You saying that this is off topic is just you avoiding how blatantly obvious it is that your evaluation system is flawed, and also that you are using it only when you see fit. Apparently it gets thrown out the window unless you are talking about Burroughs and Taylor...because even though you list Taylor as a worse college wrestler than Burroughs because he is "not on the level Burroughs was when he graduated" (meaning he can not win a world title a few months after graduation) - you still list Dake as a better college wrestler than Burroughs (51 out of 100), even though he, like Taylor, can also not be on the "level Burroughs was when he graduated", meaning winning a world title a few months out of college. This is a direct contradiction under the evaluation criteria you yourself set and use You must realize that by now, which is why I venture to say that you refuse to acknowledge it. Each wrestler has a different set of credentials. Each unique comparison is based upon those merits and are therefore off topic. I don't know where to go with this anymore, to the yes/no question of "Is March 2011 JB a better wrestler - than March 2014 DT?" My answer is yes. Therefore, he belongs at a higher place on a GOAT list than DT.
  23. Physical and mental beatings are easy to recover from. Spiritual beatings -- Those take awhile.
  • Create New...