Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
silver-medal

Biggest Surprise In Big Ten

Recommended Posts

Look at my post history, you say? Sure, let me scroll down two threads to one I started saying I think marinelli could be a third place finisher and is exciting to watch. Gosh, you're right.. all I do is hate on your precious Iowa.

 

As tiger said, my comments are observations and not degrading at all in nature. If you take issue with them maybe you should take a look in the mirror and really evaluate your program from an objective standpoint rather than put them on a pedastool.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I do find it funny that many PSU fans can't help but look for the negative only of Iowa. You guys are the best and there is no doubt. However, lay off the ridiculous Zalesky and Brands comparisons. Iowa under Zalesky was losing to MSU and he only won his championships because he inherited a Gable team that just came off scoring 170 at NCAAs. They were in a free fall when Brands took over and he righted them quickly. For the most part they haven't been a true challenger to PSU for the Past 6 years or so, but they are the ONLY team to finish top 5 every year in that span and even in this down year I don't see them finishing outside of that.

 

Here is what Iowa has done so far: beat Buffalo 33-6, Iowa Central 48-0, NDSU 38-6, Rider 35-6, #14lllinois 18-17, #18 Rutgers 23-15, Maryland 40-6 and MSU 49-6. They also scored 156.5 at Midlands beating #15(tournament) Rutgers by 47, #20 CMU by 48.5, #9 ASU by 50 and #11 SDSU by 57.5.

Individually-

125:Lee has taken over. He is 7-1 with all 7 being by tf or fall. Foley is fringe top 20, piotrowski top 15 and Russell top 10. Made a freshman mistake late in his loss that caused a somewhat controversial loss.

133:no need to discuss this weight. No one here with top 33 talent. Qualifying for NCAAs would be seriously overachieving.

141: I never really was all that high on Turk so I am content with a 2-2 or R16 type guy from rsfr Happel. He is 10-4 to guys not named Murin. All 4 are in the 12-25 range with Tyler Smith, Gasca, Van Brill and Limmex in order. He has also beat Van Brill and Ryan Diehl. So far, he is a fringe top 20 guy. Murin may prove to be a bit better, but not worth pulling the RS.

149:Sorenson is 13-0 with a win over the clear #3 at the weight in Oliver and a win over Tsirtsis who should be top10 depending on if he takes the spot over Maruca. Couldn't possibly ask for more from him at this point

157:Kemerer is 14-0 winning in dominant fashion and has wins over #7,13 and 14. Another guy that you couldn't ask for more so far.

165:Marinelli is 7-0. Banged his knee up early but hasn't faultered since making his debut. Has 2 wins over top 15 Lewis and placed ahead of top 15 Valencia. Also beat fringe top 20 Schleiffer. Yet another guy you couldn't expect more from to this point.

174:Admitedly expected more at this weight. Young appears to have not grown into the weight and Gunther also looked better at 165. Gunther is 11-2 which isn't bad, but he has no wins of note and his losses to Labriola and Pagano do not instill confidence. Should qualify but I don't see more than a win or 2 Max.

184:Bowman has been a pleasant surprise considering most didn't expect a thing out of the weight unless PDIII. Bowman could qualify but his limitations would be similar to Gunther. Still more than the zero I expected without Downey.

197:Wilcke has continued to improve and has shown his R12 performance last year wasn't a fluke. He is 13-0 with wins over top 15 guys in Brucki and Mattiace while also finishing above top 10 Rotert. Also beat his teammate Jacob Warner. Another guy that you couldn't ask for more from this point.

285:Stoll is 12-0. Hate his style all you want, but if guys push back they go flying. Has a win over top 5 Hall and top 20 wins over Jennings and gunner. Yet another guy that you couldn't ask more of to this point.

 

174 is the only weight I expected more from. Still, I don't see how you can reasonably say Brands hasn't done a strong job with his team to this point. Now if you want to reserve judgement until they hit some top talent that is fine. But, they do wrestle OkState tomorrow and I think that should add enough to make a fair assessment.

Edited by MSU158

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I recognize the Midlands didn't have a deep field.  But they're not just winning--they're crushing the mediocre teams and gutting out wins against some solid teams (Illinois and Rutgers).   Maybe my expectations were too low?  

 

Long season to go.  But good start for the Hawks and things are looking up.  

Edited by silver-medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Looking forward to the Okie State match. I think Iowa takes it if Downey wrestles

 

Any word from the Iowa faithful if Downey will be eligible this match?

 

I have Lee, Sorensen, Kem, Maranelli, Downey and Stoll. Maranelli and Stoll need to come up big here

 

Speaking of Okie State. Who the heck is Derick White? I’ve watched him twice and came away very impressed

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Edited by pish6969

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

However, lay off the ridiculous Zalesky and Brands comparisons. Iowa under Zalesky was losing to MSU and he only won his championships because he inherited a Gable team that just came off scoring 170 at NCAAs. They were in a free fall when Brands took over and he righted them quickly.

Weren’t you around when we used to discuss Brands having the benefit of merging VT and Iowa recruits to start his career at Iowa? We used to fight about all the specifics but in the end I recall people generally agreeing that Zalesky and Brands both had a nice kickstart.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Iowa has exceeded my expectations every year since 2010.  At the start of each season their lineup appears to have big holes, looks like a bad year for them, but the holes get filled, they just get better throughout the season...they finish strong, in the last seven years, 3rd, 3rd, 4th, 4th, 2nd, 5th, 4th.  Good coaching,

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Weren’t you around when we used to discuss Brands having the benefit of merging VT and Iowa recruits to start his career at Iowa? We used to fight about all the specifics but in the end I recall people generally agreeing that Zalesky and Brands both had a nice kickstart.

Yeah I was around and thought that logic was ridiculous. You have 9.9 scholarships. All the key guys that left lost a year of eligibility but tied up that same amount of scholarships that could have been used to recruit with the year they had to ride the pine. Also, it isn't like he walked into a team loaded with AA's.

 

The double recruit logic was so stupid. So do you take away Sanderson's first 4 because Taylor, Long and Brown ended up all following him to PSU at some point? Of course not. Purely stupid logic used by people that didn't want Iowa to become relevant again and disliked Brands.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So let’s say Brands gets recruited to be an assistant under Zalesky. Redshirted Metcalf, Borschel, Slaton, LeClere all transfer to Iowa. Gable comes out of retirement to help Zalesky and Brands. Would Zalesky return to his winning ways?

Edited by headshuck

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wasn't around on this forum when that discussion happened. 

MSU, did you think it made for sense for guys like Metcalf and Taylor to stay behind and hope their new, uncertain visions would work out?  Or, did you think it made sense for Brands and Sanderson to quench whatever fire they had started before they left? I'm obviously playing a common experience card here instead of a math card, but how is any of that ridiculous? 

I think that when a new leader steps in, especially when they bring a new vision, they bring their whole GD worldview and their supporting cast of believers.  "Logic" is a weird way to measure those transitions. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So let’s say Brands gets recruited to be an assistant under Zalesky, and the redshirted Metcalf, Borschel, Slaton, LeClere all come with him, would Zalesky return to his winning ways?

No. Zalesky was a great wrestler and a very good Assistant. He was not/is not a top 10 head coach.

They were all Brands recruits, recruited by Brands and all gave up a year of eligibility to follow him. Iowa still covered that scholarship for that missed year. If Brands inherited say Molinaro, Wright and Ruth, then I could see the argument or even if all those guys wrestled their 1st season, but they all lost a fricking year.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wasn't around on this forum when that discussion happened. 

MSU, did you think it made for sense for guys like Metcalf and Taylor to stay behind and hope their new, uncertain visions would work out?  Or, did you think it made sense for Brands and Sanderson to quench whatever fire they had started before they left? I'm obviously playing a common experience card here instead of a math card, but how is any of that ridiculous? 

I think that when a new leader steps in, especially when they bring a new vision, they bring their whole GD worldview and their supporting cast of believers.  "Logic" is a weird way to measure those transitions.

 

Taylor was a high school senior when he decommited from ISU. Pretty big difference there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No. Zalesky was a great wrestler and a very good Assistant. He was not/is not a top 10 head coach.

They were all Brands recruits, recruited by Brands and all gave up a year of eligibility to follow him. Iowa still covered that scholarship for that missed year. If Brands inherited say Molinaro, Wright and Ruth, then I could see the argument or even if all those guys wrestled their 1st season, but they all lost a fricking year.

If they hadn't lost a fricking year Iowa would have been a lot stronger in 2007. Still doesn't change the fact that it was a dual recruiting class.

If Brands was hired as Zalesky's assistant and brought those guys with him, Iowa absolutely would have still won in 2008,2009, and 2010.

Edited by BigTenFanboy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wasn't around on this forum when that discussion happened.

MSU, did you think it made for sense for guys like Metcalf and Taylor to stay behind and hope their new, uncertain visions would work out? Or, did you think it made sense for Brands and Sanderson to quench whatever fire they had started before they left? I'm obviously playing a common experience card here instead of a math card, but how is any of that ridiculous?

I think that when a new leader steps in, especially when they bring a new vision, they bring their whole GD worldview and their supporting cast of believers. "Logic" is a weird way to measure those transitions.

I have no issue with them leaving. They wanted to wrestle for the coaches that recruited them. My issue is with the ridiculously stupid way people try to use to discredit Iowa's three championships under Brands. PSU benefited mightily from Taylor switching to PSU to follow Sanderson as well as Long and Brown. Funny that wasn't argued much and sure doesn't have legs on this site 10 years later.

 

Do I think it diminishes what PSU did under Sanderson during that time frame? not one fricking bit. 9.9 scholarships. With them all losing a year of eligibility it is actually more like them getting 3 transfers(as LeClere didn't really make a difference) that has to sit out a year.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If they hadn't lost a fricking year Iowa would have been a lot stronger in 2007. Still doesn't change the fact that it was a dual recruiting class.

If Brands was hired as Zalesky's assistant and brought those guys with him, Iowa absolutely would have still won in 2008,2009, and 2010.

My exact point was the price they paid for those guys negated the perceived double recruit nonsense. Also, I am sorry but Taylor committed to Sanderson and left because he left. Saying it isn't the same because he hadn't yet redshirted is disingenuous.

 

I am not going to start down this road with you. I have said my piece. I don't see Zalesky as remotely similar to Brands and the double recruit argument is beyond stupid to me. If you believe otherwise we can agree to disagree.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My exact point was the price they paid for those guys negated the perceived double recruit nonsense. Also, I am sorry but Taylor committed to Sanderson and left because he left. Saying it isn't the same because he hadn't yet redshirted is disingenuous.

I am not going to start down this road with you. I have said my piece. I don't see Zalesky as remotely similar to Brands and the double recruit argument is beyond stupid to me. If you believe otherwise we can agree to disagree.

Yes but Taylor had not even graduated high when he decommited. He had not even attended a single class at ISU. Go ahead and used Andrew Long and Matt Brown and even his brother Cyler Sanderson in your arguement, but Taylor is almost no different than Gavin Teasdale switching to PSU.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes but Taylor had not even graduated high when he decommited. He had not even attended a single class at ISU. Go ahead and used Andrew Long and Matt Brown and even his brother Cyler Sanderson in your arguement, but Taylor is almost no different than Gavin Teasdale switching to PSU.

Wrong. He signed a letter of intent. ISU could have chosen not to release him. Gavin had not. He owed Iowa nothing at that point.

 

Still, I am not sure what you think your argument is. Taylor wanted to wrestle for Sanderson and changed schools to follow him. That is the EXACT same thing the VTech guys did to follow Brands. Whether or not they were enrolled for 1 year or solely a signed commit wouldn't change the "double recruit" logic.

Edited by MSU158

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wrong. He signed a letter of intent. ISU could have chosen not to release him.

I know that, but the fact of the matter is he was still in high school. Yes Iowa State could have decided to hold him to it, but at the same time he hadn't used a single penny of scholarship money yet. It's a very different situation from the Metcalf story.

 

To me the Taylor situation is like putting a doposit on a car and then deciding before actually getting it, I no longer want to buy it and getting my deposit back.

 

The Metcalf situation is like leasing a car and then returning it after 1 year and not expecting to pay some sort of penalty.

 

Like I said, Andrew Long, Matt Brown? Sure it's the same thing. David Taylor who had not yet graduated high school? Completely different story.

 

And keep in mind I WANTED Metcalf and company to get their release. I always rooted for Metcalf over Schlatter back in their high school days and wanted to see him wrestle in college asap.

Edited by BigTenFanboy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wrong. He signed a letter of intent. ISU could have chosen not to release him. Gavin had not. He owed Iowa nothing at that point.

Still, I am not sure what you think your argument is. Taylor wanted to wrestle for Sanderson and changed schools to follow him. That is the EXACT same thing the VTech guys did to follow Brands. Whether or not they were enrolled for 1 year or solely a signed commit wouldn't change the "double recruit" logic.

It absolutely would. Brands arrived at Iowa with a team of wrestlers that Zalesky had recruited. Along with those wrestlers he got a crop of wrestlers to come along with him that he recruited for VirginaTech. Thats a double recruiting class.

 

Sanderson had the same thing. He arrived at PSU with a team of wrestlers that Sunderland had recruited. Along with those wrestlers he got a crop of wrestlers to come along with him that he recruited for ISU. Also a double recruting class.

 

To deny these as not being dual recruiting classes is silly.

 

As for the Taylor situation I'm saying his case and Metcalfs case is completely different. ISU had little to no logical reason not to release him. Virginia tech on the other hand absolutely had a logical reason to not release those guys. I diidnt agree with it but it was still valid.

Edited by BigTenFanboy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...