Jump to content

jinks

Members
  • Content Count

    17
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  1. Definitely agree Hamlin has had the best collegiate career of anyone from Vermont... in terms of non-collegiate, we also need to add Erin Clodgo to the discussion... she's a current women's freestyler and pretty darn good!
  2. Yeah, I've wondered the same thing about how they decide to cover certain schools versus others. I used to enjoy seeing less-known schools get some air-time on Flo, and have to admit that one of the main reasons I've stopped going to their website lately is because they seem to favor a few schools (Iowa, Cornell, etc.). If the less known, smaller, or new-program schools now have to pay to have Flo come visit them, then it's understandable why that type of content has decreased. Sometimes it leads me to wonder if they're acting more like fans or responsible journalists. It's great to be a fan, but when their bias is so apparent, it's really off-putting.
  3. Not sure what Rob Koll is going to do about it. I could understand the arguement more if Hamlin didn't beat Bosak earlier this year. Mustang - but Bosak was still in recovery from his Staph infection. By the logic of Hamlin not losing seed, this should clealy matter in seeding right? Hamlin has three losses, including to a low ranked opponent. He also finished 7th in a tournament Bosak won. He is not get an auto bid to nationals. All that outweighs your argument. There are a TON of guys seeded lower than those they beat head to head. The body of work outweighs that head to head - rightly. Look at Nevinger as an example! Yeah, other guys are seeded lower than those they beat head to head, but only if they had other losses as well.... "The body of work" in this case is wins against every person he faced seeded below him (except for an injury default). I honestly thought his seeding would drop (and I'm sure so did he). I'm trying to understand the seeding committee's decision, and hence trying to provide some supportive evidence (which does exist). They must have wanted to reward the head to head and also not create the scenario where there were guys seeded above him who he beat (e.g., Bosak, Steinhaus). Maybe they looked at outcomes against common opponents, e.g., Ruth? Not sure. I feel for your argument, but I also don't think it's COMPLETELY ludicrous... I mean, look at it the other way and the guy works his ass off all season, beats Bosak (again!!!!), among others, only loses to the top 2 guys, then gets hurt in the final week before EIWAs and he should be penalized? It sucks either way.
  4. I don't know which tournament you were watching, but I was there, section 105, with the majority of Cornell fans - no one was cheering when Hamlin had to quit, and on the contrary, everyone I know had been anticipating a rematch in the finals. Hmmm, you must not have looked over at your coaches...
  5. False - if you include the injury default, Hamlin has 3 losses, Bosak has 2. So Bosak has the better record, AND is the conference champion (finishing higher than Hamlin). Truth, sorry about that... saw a record that said 20-4, which apparently isn't correct. I'd feel bad about the seeding but Hamlin beat Bosak head-to-head. Plus, why were some Cornell fans cheering when Hamlin injury defaulted? They thought it would impact seeding? They worried Bosak couldn't beat Hamlin in the EIWA finals? So CU people don't want Bosak to wrestle Hamlin because they don't like his odds against him, but they want Bosak seeded higher, even though their words on this board and reaction reflects they fear Hamlin's more likely to win the match-up. Hmmm....
  6. I don't think anyone is forgetting Howe...I do however (no pun intended) think you seem to be grossly underestimating Dake and Taylor in folkstyle. I don't think either of them are "lucky" that Howe is taking another season off...Howe vs. either of these two is probably a toss-up but it is not as if Howe just walks with a title and these two fight for 2nd place if he was in this year. I don't even think he'd win it! And I dont exactly think that - I just stated that I don't think Howe is superior in folkstyle...certainly not to warrant saying "Dake and Taylor are both fortunate this year that Howe is not competing." Somehow talks go from Dake being one of the best ever, to him being lucky that Howe (a 1 time champ and 2 time finalist) isn't competing. :roll: I'm with paver1surf1. Howe's a beast. He may have taken JB down more times (and scored more points) in a single match than anybody else in the world. His handfighting is second to none, he's beaten Dake and Taylor the last time they wrestled. Oh, and then there was that time that he placed 3rd with his hamstring TORN OFF THE BONE. Impossible for a human to wrestle like that? You're right, the guy's a machine. It would definitely make for a very interesting year if Howe would have been in the mix.
  7. First, last year's results aren't counted into the seeding, so the fact that he won last year or beat Bennett in the past isnt counted, just like Hamlin's past win over Bennett wasn't counted. Bosak got the fourth seed because he lost to Hamlin head to head and even when you count Hamlin's injury default as a loss, Bosak STILL has one more loss than Hamlin. I could have seen seeds justified both ways, but then you'd have people screaming when Hamlin was lower. I agree, seeding committees need to be careful about awarding forfeits, but that would also suck for the guys that were legitamitejy injured (like Hamlin).
  8. True, hadn't considered some of the negatives to his support!
  9. Why is it so hard to swallow what most of us are saying? We AGREE with the need for rule changes, etc. We just said it may help if Dana was on board. The man has a legion of faithful followers and public influence. Someone like him can get the movement more media coverage, more media coverage in the US means more chances of influencing sponsors, like NBC, more push means more chances for the IOC to feel pressure. Yes, it probably makes .00001% of difference, but so be it. That's more of an impact than my 15 letters to IOC members, journalists, and celebrities (e.g., John Irving) have. At this point losing .00001 of influence is more than I want to concede, hence bummed at lack of Dana's support. We're just mentioning it... It's not like our whole campaign is based on him. Just bringing it up to express disappointment. I'm spending all my other hours actively helping the cause (and I should have just stuck to that... Who knew saying something so basic would inspire so much misinterpretation.)
  10. I think there is a lot of adjustment and overcoming going on. I'm doing my part as best I can too... giving money, posting, writing IOC members, writing journalists every single day, getting every single human that I come in contact with (even non-wrestling people) to sign petitions, working with the local wrestling clubs and teams to brainstorm collective methods of support, coming up with media ideas to market the movement and talking to members of the wrestling media on all levels... (Meanwhile are you just brainstorming ideas at your computer or are you taking measurable action?) So because we call Dana White out we're playing the victim? Are we not allowed to comment on it? I was expressing frustration because if he would express support it could be a great publicity boost to the movement... if he shats on it then it may encourage others to do the same... and he has quite the following. I explicitly said he doesn't have an obligation. Because he doesn't. After all, it's America, and he can think and say whatever he wants! But his support would have been useful. That's my point.
  11. Totally agree with Ohio and TripnSweep... used to be a UFC fan and he literally just lost me after one interview. No, it's not his responsibility to keep wrestling alive, but how about some support for a sport that helps keep his alive!! There's no chance MMA gets to where it is without high school and college wrestling. Plus, like others said, there's no way MMA would ever be a high school or college-sanctioned sport. And it won't make it in the Olympics either... how would they work out that bracket?... usually people fight just a couple fights a year - if it was the Olympics they'd have to fight several fights in a 2 week time period. Plus a bunch of other reasons. But anyway, I think what turned me off the most was his blatant, unabashed, and explicit citing of revenue and marketing as the reasons he's not behind the wrestling cause... the SAME REASONS the douches on the IOC used to make up their minds. Meanwhile, wrestling DOES make money at the Olympics and people DO watch it more than other sports and participation numbers ARE increasing... but it also begs the question... since when did this society become about ratings and money? Since when did athletic achievement become about ratings and money? And is that what sports are really about? (If you're not sure, the answer is "No"). Dana White didn't even have to say he's never wrestled... his character makes the statement for him.
  12. I think the reason the fan base isn't freaking out a bit more right now is because even the nuttiest of Lu fans sees that there have been one too many uncontrollable factors to blame the entirety of lehigh's record on his coaching job. I mean 2 schollie guys out of 10 go down to literal could-be-deadly illnesses, plus add some more injuries (Napoli, Brill, Salupo) and guys out on redshirt, and your left with this kind of season. I don't know, maybe some of the die-hards are ready to pull the plug but I don't think so... It's one thing to under perform with an intact line-up, it's another to have a shaky year with guys that are supposed to be shaky. In other words, it's not like guys are getting upset left and right... The guys on the team that are 'supposed' to win do win, and some making some good strides throughout the season (Welsh, Nap, Brown especially) Heck they would have beat Oregon state with Napoli, and did beat Oklahoma without him. In the end I just dont think you can take these kind of uncontrollable line-up lumps and put it all on Santoro for not creating some dynamite season (although you can hold him accountable for other things). And I think the Lu train agrees... For now.
  13. Holy crap you are negative and biased, hatchetjack. Can anybody say anything even neutral about an Lu guy? Dang dude, chill out. Your posts are like thread killers... You're over the top and missing the point.
  14. Cael Sanderson and Channing Tatum
  15. I think Wrestling17601's point may have been missed, maybe because he linked to a specific match. In general, it's fair to say some of Dake's actions represent a cockiness that some don't like (me included). This doesn't mean he isn't an absolutely incredible wrestler (he is), but he brings an attitude with it that turns me off to him as a wrestling fan... in interviews he usually pats himself on the back and doesn't give credit to his opponent, coaches, etc., during matches he often makes comments to the refs or signals for stalling, and after matches against opponents that aren't even ranked he'll often keep his arms up, celebrate, and clap for a while on the mat - hell, I've even seen him clap during his match! I know what people are going to say... he's allowed to do that, he's just confident, he deserves it, yada yada... and yeah, he can do whatever he wants... but not everybody has to like that style, hence a thread on his cockiness. I'm an old-school wrestling fan... I like seeing guys who put their head down and fight hard for 7 minutes and get their hand raised and have some humility. Andrew Howe is one of a million examples of guys like this... he goes out, he wrestles hard, he gets his hand raised (or not), he complements his opponents when interviewed, and that's that. To me that's having humility and class and character for the sport. Who knows, maybe Dake is good for the sport like some say, but I'll still take the hard-working wrestler who's not an attention seeker any day.
×
×
  • Create New...