Jump to content

boconnell

Members
  • Content Count

    3,933
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    22

Posts posted by boconnell


  1. 4 hours ago, Perry said:

    149 is brutal but I think I would take Caldwell at his peak. His domination of metcalf still sticks with me.

    Big fan of the askren pick as well

    If by 'at his peak' you mean that weekend in March I agree.  He was unbeatable that weekend.  But even the rest of that season he wasn't that guy.  He just was never a guy who was going to grind out 3 months of winning mentally or physically.  Plus he never came close to that peak again after that tournament.


  2. 1 hour ago, whaletail said:

    Unquestionably, but as long as the better wrestler, on the day, wins, it's hard to get worked up about it.

    Ahead going into the third, and with choice, Churella gave the match away, not the refs.

    Yep.  One of the TD calls was terrible, and the pin was questionable.  But Churella hit a big move for a lead, and then ineffectively ran for the entire 3rd period.  And if the TD isn't called it's fair to assume Hendricks takes him down again if needed.  Churella offered zero resistance the whole 3rd period.  


  3. 13 hours ago, shieldofpistis said:

    I wish it was a strawman.  Before I started posting- when I was  just a lurker- this topic would come up now and again.  I think when Logan retired there were several who only considered him a 2 timer that that is what am responding do.  I am not trying to tear Mark Hall or Yianni down.  I think Logan should be recongized as 4 timer though. 

     

    Just ask the people on the site.  There are some who don't think he should be considered a 4 timer because they think he lost to JO. 

    There is nobody who thinks he's a 2 time champ.  Many people think the match should have been scored differently (like a million other matches).  Zero people think he's not a 4X champ.

    You had a soapbox and you created a fake argument to make the climb onto your soapbox easier.  

     


  4. 27 minutes ago, silvermedal said:

    If you don't compete in the Big Ten, it's hard to know how good you really are.  Sorry....not sorry.  Zahid Valencia is the one huge exception.  

    Get out of here with that.  Half of the Big Ten doesn't wrestle each other, the bottom half largely doesn't wrestle the top half, and outside of conference duals, the Big Ten schedules just like everyone else.  Top end Big Ten schedules might be slightly harder then the non-Big Ten in the top 15 teams, but it isn't night and day.  


  5. 4 hours ago, ugarte said:

    sometimes yes and sometimes no. staying in the center but sprawling back or flinching back at every hint of a shot without any offensive effort eventually does sometimes get a whistle but it's less egregious than a third period in hide-and-seek mode. i'm just explaining why i think refs call it that way.

    The refs call it that way because one guy is winning and the other is losing.  It bears no resemblance to how they call stalling the rest of the match.


  6. 18 hours ago, ugarte said:

    I think the answer is that you have to stay engaged. even if you aren't taking shots, if you aren't backing away you probably don't get dinged. what you see a lot from people winning by just a few is that they throw it in reverse to run out the clock and that isn't wrestling.

    Actually if the guy stays in the center he still gets dinged.  Refs are human and stalling calls are often optics as much as anything else.


  7. On 1/26/2020 at 6:08 PM, Class of 1970 said:

    Does anyone really think Wyatt Sheets belongs in the Cowboy lineup next season? His skill level always seems below that of any really good wrestler he comes up against. I think he would flourish at a D-ll school. Not Cowboy material. 

     

    Great thread. 


  8. 15 minutes ago, ionel said:

    It's not about Iowa, it's about what happens in Carver.  It's better than it used, think some of the new rules were written because of the Iowa style & they had to adjust & change.  But an example from Fri, not sure who think Marinelli, Gibbons said something to the affect that the crowd was really getting on the ref wanting stalling call when Marinelli was pushing Cenzo out of bounds.  By rule that would be stalling on Marinelli. Just go to Carver and sit and listen and watch the impact on the ref.  My estimate there's ~2k Carver fans who understand wrestling & rules and ~10k who just echo the first guy to call stalling.  Other places do the same but none with as much influence.  Go back & look at points scored & stalls called.  When you are scoring more points how are you also stalling more?.

    It's very easy to score points and stall more, especially with automatic rules on backing out of bounds and dropping to the ankle.  Last night's match was well officiated.  The example you gave is of a comment by the TV announcer, and the actual ref in the match completely ignored the fans you are referencing.  

    But I agree Iowa fans complain louder and more often about stalling then any other fans.  I also agree refs sometimes listen to those loud fans.  Last night they didn't.  


  9. 4 minutes ago, ionel said:

    I might've missed some but I counted 1 against Iowa & 8 PSU.  And yes that is normal in CHA.  Now I will say Nevills deserved both of his.

    When a team scores more TDs in a match is that a reffing imbalance?  Or is it that 1 team was better in that dual at takedowns?

    Iowa was much better at not stalling in this dual.


  10. 7 minutes ago, wrestlingnerd said:

    It really was an awesome move. Digging that second undertook in there and arching way back to secure it took balls and commitment. He was so close too. I think rewarding non-control TDs in folkstyle is too philosophically far from the folkstyle core, but I’d be in favor of a slipped throw rule of some sort to encourage that kind of risk. Of course, then you’d have to nullify the escape or guys would be slip-throwing their way to bottom to get the 1, etc. And then it’s even harder to follow the rules. That throw was my favorite moment of an incredible top 10 ever type of dual, and I’d love to see more of that type of action. 

    I love the throw.  If he hits it the match is over even if he doesn't get the pin, because nobody is coming back from down 6 on Mark Hall.  

    But he had 95% of a great move.  Kemmerer had 100% of a great counter to that great move.  I think it was all awesome and all scored like it should be.


  11. 1 hour ago, wrestlingnerd said:

    I’m asking seriously: Does the joke about Hall’s head size refer to its physical size or the idea that some think he is full of himself? If the former, I honestly don’t see it. 

    Actual head size.  He looks like a walking candy apple. 

    He definitely doesn't seem full of himself and I mean to insult only his giant noggin, not his excellent wrestling or character.


  12. 1 hour ago, custom fitch said:

    I agree Hall looks and is very small for his weight class but his college record does speak for itself. Yeah he hates weight cutting but there's probably not going to be a place for him at the next level if he doesn't suck it up and cut some weight. Who knows what weight class that is, I mean my eyes tell me he's even smaller than Dake or JB. 30 years ago he wouldn't have had a choice and would have been wrestling in the 150 lb class I bet. 

    I thought it was generally accepted that Mark Halls head counts for an additional weight class.  


  13. 2 minutes ago, Plasmodium said:

    More rule tweaking is in order.  I thought it was sad Hall got nothing for his throw yesterday.  It was a great wrestling move.

    If you value things that look good it was a great wrestling move.  I prefer moves that end in a takedown.  If he had done the same thing and ended up on top it would have been awesome.  I am fine with it looking great and not scoring.  


  14. 9 hours ago, TobusRex said:

    Something like that happened to me in 6th grade. I got benched by a better wrestler after Christmas (he ate too much and decided to settle at 97 pounds instead of his normal 92 pound class!).  A couple weeks later my school hosted the conference tournament and all wrestlers were invited. I was seeded 4th despite being 2nd team, and made my way to the finals after upsetting an unbeaten kid with a hunchback (no joke) in the semis. In the finals I did a fantastic double leg to the kid who was the starter ahead of me, straight to his back. He started crying, the ref stopped the match to console him....and I never got my 4 points for the takedown and NF. He "beat" me 2-1. Since that day I've hated crybabies.

    The irony is awesome here.

    You declare you hate crybabies while whining about how you were cheated in a 6th grade wrestling match.  I'm not trying to be a jerk but this was just too much.


  15. 31 minutes ago, 4awrestler said:

    As to the Iowa fans denying serious bias in favor of them, any outside fan with no skin in the game could clearly tell that the stall calls and edge of mat calls by a landslide went in their favor, anyone that says otherwise is blinded by black and gold glasses.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

    I'm not an Iowa fan and have no bias for them (serious or other).

    I thought Warner should have got a courtesy warning with about 15 seconds left.  I thought PSU's 149 got hit an extra time in the 3rd period on bottom in a match that was already over.

    Aside from that I think guys got hit when they backed up, didn't attack, went straight off the mat, or dropped to an ankle.  I think Iowa guys are clearly coached to not do those things.  PSU guys are coached on wrestling moves and they have great gameplans and tactics, but when the PSU guys don't use those moves they stall.  They aren't coached in the same ways to make it look good.  Iowa guys are very good at not doing stalling things even when they aren't using wrestling moves.  

    From a super simple perspective, one team sat with their butts in the middle of the center circle and the other team got hit for stalling more.  That's what should happen.  And it didn't happen more often then it should.  In 10 mostly close matches the officials didn't impact or even influence the outcome of a single match.  That's rare in our sport.  And yet I think 10% of the posts I read while watching the dual were complaints about officials in Carver.  It might be generally true but it wasn't close to true tonight.


  16. 1 hour ago, goheels1812 said:

    That’s fine. But chandler is still a returning 2 time all American that’s grinding making weight at 165 all year and he won 17 matches with no bad losses. He gave a lot to Oklahoma state and John Smith. If you can’t see why that guy deserved to wrestle in the NCAA tournament his senior season then I doubt we will see eye to eye on this. If you can find another example of a senior 2 time all American getting booted out of the lineup in the 11th hour for another wrestler coming down a weight I’d be shocked. Saying that Chandler “didn’t deserve” his spot is crazy to me. 

    Smith was a 2X AA as well.

    Rogers had a bad season where he lost to the top 15 type guys he wrestled.  Then he lost twice to a fringe top 15 guy in Smith.  I've never considered wrestling to be a sport where guys get given spots because they tried hard or sacrificed a lot.  

    Rogers is my favorite Cowboy of the last 5 years but he had a bad season and got beat out of the spot.  I can't complain on his behalf when his failure to win matches was the reason he wasn't in the lineup.

    Again I have no problem with someone complaining that Smith didn't deserve the spot.  I agree.  I would have gone with Rogers.  But I do have a problem with pretending that Rogers was robbed or that he lost his spot due to anything other than his lack of performance.  


  17. 26 minutes ago, goheels1812 said:

    Sure I’d love to. Chandler was a returning 2 time all American for the team that was 17-3 on the season. He would have been appropriately seeded in the NCAA tournament (probably around the 12 seed ish range) and had obviously shown the chops to make the podium. Then along comes Joe coming down to 165 in the 11th hour with dads permission to take Rogders spot. That’s one of the only time ever I’ve thought a wrestle off was bull crap because it was that late in the season. So instead Joe gets a 33 seed (which was obviously going to happen) and doesn’t even all American. Neither did Jacobe smith at 174.  And Geer was a low AA at 184. And with that, chandlers career was over in BS fashion. He deserved to go out wrestling in the NCAA tournament.

    You quote 17-3 but fail to mention he beat nobody and lost to every good wrestler he faced as a senior.  Smith didn't overwhelmingly deserve the spot, but neither did Rogers.  Smith had the clearly superior season before the wrestle off result.  


  18. Joe Smith is burned out and is not a good wrestler right now.  He wasn't great and was in terrible shape last year.  This isn't up for debate.

    But some people are looking at these facts and creating the narrative that Rogers got cheated last year.  I would have preferred Rogers wrestle and think it was a bad decision to go with Joe, but Rogers has only himself to blame for it.  He had a bad senior season.  His best win all season was Connor Flynn and he lost to Ashworth and Finesilver.  Then he lost multiple wrestle off matches to Joe Smith.  Smith wasn't great last year but he had far superior wins entering the postseason.  I still would have chosen Rogers over Smith because he'd have likely scored a few bonus on his way to a 1-2 or 2-2 tournament, but it wasn't some travesty that an underperforming guy was left out of the lineup after losing a wrestle off.  

×
×
  • Create New...