Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Peso

Comparing dynasties

Recommended Posts

I'm with Peso. Wrestled in the same general area about 5 years or so after he did. The multiple riding time point thing was gone, but 1 riding time point was still around.

 

I enjoy reading the brackets, looking at past results and comparing teams. OSU was the best for a long time, but there were other teams occasionally popping up and winning even in OSU's heyday. Iowa was pretty good already, but when Gable got there most of the best wrestlers wanted to go there as well. Same as PSU now with Cael. But Cael's teams seem more creative than Gable's teams did. Gable's guys were more grindy, in general. Would've been fun to see Gable's best team vs Cael's best team. Somebody needs to invent a time machine!

Edited by TobusRex

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Still love looking at 1988.  PA with 6 national champions and only 1 was at PSU and none were Big 10.

 

Cuvo-East Stroudsburg

Martin-PSU

Santoro-Pitt

Turner-NC State

Koll-UNC

Haselrig-Pitt-Johnsontown

Edited by paboom

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Still love looking at 1988.  PA with 6 national champions and only 1 was at PSU and none were Big 10.

 

Cuvo-East Stroudsburg

Martin-PSU

Santoro-Pitt

Turner-NC State

Koll-UNC

Haselrig-Pitt-Johnsontown

and then 1989 wasn't too shabby either with Cuvo (beat another Pa guy Wyland in finals), O'Day, Santoro, and Haselrig as champs.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Still love looking at 1988.  PA with 6 national champions and only 1 was at PSU and none were Big 10.

 

Cuvo-East Stroudsburg

Martin-PSU

Santoro-Pitt

Turner-NC State

Koll-UNC

Haselrig-Pitt-Johnsontown

3 from district 11.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would argue that it was easier for Iowa to win team titles back then. Talent was spread out nationally, so they didn't need to accumulate as much.

The top-tier guys who in the old days may have gone to Syracuse, Notre Dame, or some other school that was not competitive in the team race are now mostly going to one of four teams. This means Cael may get the #1 guy at a weight, but still has to worry about the #2 guy going to OSU, tOSU, or Iowa.

 

FWIW, I would submit that it was harder to win the team title back then.  There were approx. 180 DI teams during Gable's reign.  DII NCAA champions, runners-up + wildcards (1972 Gary Barton-Clarion St. 134 w/c), DIII Champions (1977 Ken Mallory- Montclair St.134) were included in the DI championships.  More variables with more competitors. One may argue that there is more  concentration of good wrestlers at a few schools and that's probably true, but only one guy can compete. the others have to watch.  If those #2,3, and 4's had options to compete elsewhere with different coaching, workout partners, etc., they have the chance of becoming a spoiler, e.g., Suriano.  If he stays at PSU, maybe he's in the stands watching. Even tho he didn't win it, he took out some very good kids.  

As one who was fortunate enough to compete/coach against one of the greatest wrestling dynasties ever, I can assure you that the Gable coached Iowa teams beat some very, very good competition.  It didn't seem that way because they were so superior in so many ways.  From the first year that Gable was hired as asst. coach at Iowa, his impact was obvious.  His coaching style, intensity, influence, and the rules of the time allowed him to make it look like there was little competition.  They were relentless, physical, in-your-face, and constantly pressuring you.  Factor in the 8 minute matches, their 3 acre wrestling mat, the rules of the time, and a rabid fan base and all the ingredients were there for domination.  I witnessed many excellent wrestlers get way ahead on points with Gable's kids, only to not just get beat, but eventually get pummeled or pinned because they were just too damn tired to keep fighting.  They were hard to hold down, they were hard to escape, and if you did, they were back in your face, pressuring, pushing, pulling, banging, and wearing you down. How he used the rules to his advantage was masterful in and of itself. With all due respect, Cael's a great coach and great guy, but I would still put my money on a Gable coached team v PSU or any other team now for that matter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

3 from district 11.

2 from mostly rural district 6 (Hidlay territory) and 1 from completely rural district 4 (Retherford territory).

 

That was when D11 was the power area. It's now the WPIAL. Lee, Nolf, and Joseph.

 

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I take it this topic is only about the individual tournament at the end of the year where a team champion is decided?  Some may think that there is more to wrestling than just those three days.

For instance, Minny had an 18 year dual streak without a loss versus Penn State.  Minny has 9 National Dual Championships during it's knock-out days.  Here is a comparison with PSU:

...........MN...PSU

1998) ..1..... 3

1999) ..2.... dnp

2000) ..2... .dnp

2001) ..1.... dnp

2002) ..1... dne

2003) ..5... dne

2004) ..7... dnp

2005) ..3... dnp

2006).. 1... dne

2007) ..1... dne

2008) ..4... 6

2009) ..6... dnp

2010) ..4.. .dnp

2011) ..4.. .dne

2012) ..1.. .dne

2013) ..1.. .dne

2014) ..1... dne

2015) dnp. dne

 

Of course, this was back when Penn State didn't have any good wrestlers;  Kerry McCoy, Cary Kolat, Sanshiro Abe, Ken Chertow, Jim Martin, Jeremy Hunter, Phil Davis, JaMarr Billman, Glenn Pritzlaff, Jeff Prescott, Troy Sunderland, John & Russ Hughes, John Strittmatter, Haladay, Wittman, Truby, Sutter, Hart, Nelson, White, Voit, etc.

 

Great point!  Forever we had the big 4 in college wrestling.  OSU, ISU, IU, OU.  I believe Minnesota was the only addition to that group for 50 years, but Cael + Pennsylvania = mo-betta.  I believe JRob was a bigger influence in Iowa City than most realize.  Then of course, his first thought, much less first vote, hall of fame career in Minnesota is a lifetime accomplishment that probably passes or equals the great Harold Nichols from Iowa State, or Tommy Evans from OU...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

FWIW, I would submit that it was harder to win the team title back then.  There were approx. 180 DI teams during Gable's reign.  DII NCAA champions, runners-up + wildcards (1972 Gary Barton-Clarion St. 134 w/c), DIII Champions (1977 Ken Mallory- Montclair St.134) were included in the DI championships.  More variables with more competitors. One may argue that there is more  concentration of good wrestlers at a few schools and that's probably true, but only one guy can compete. the others have to watch.  If those #2,3, and 4's had options to compete elsewhere with different coaching, workout partners, etc., they have the chance of becoming a spoiler, e.g., Suriano.  If he stays at PSU, maybe he's in the stands watching. Even tho he didn't win it, he took out some very good kids.  

As one who was fortunate enough to compete/coach against one of the greatest wrestling dynasties ever, I can assure you that the Gable coached Iowa teams beat some very, very good competition.  It didn't seem that way because they were so superior in so many ways.  From the first year that Gable was hired as asst. coach at Iowa, his impact was obvious.  His coaching style, intensity, influence, and the rules of the time allowed him to make it look like there was little competition.  They were relentless, physical, in-your-face, and constantly pressuring you.  Factor in the 8 minute matches, their 3 acre wrestling mat, the rules of the time, and a rabid fan base and all the ingredients were there for domination.  I witnessed many excellent wrestlers get way ahead on points with Gable's kids, only to not just get beat, but eventually get pummeled or pinned because they were just too damn tired to keep fighting.  They were hard to hold down, they were hard to escape, and if you did, they were back in your face, pressuring, pushing, pulling, banging, and wearing you down. How he used the rules to his advantage was masterful in and of itself. With all due respect, Cael's a great coach and great guy, but I would still put my money on a Gable coached team v PSU or any other team now for that matter.

 

Great points Pat!  I think Cael is getting close, but I agree, not quite the king of the mat yet.  These Penn St Teams, I would say the same thing.  The fans now who didn't see those hawkeye teams, seem to not be able to believe it.  Different era, different rules, but they changed the sport on the world level.  I put Taylor, Zain, Nolf, Ruth, Nickal on the mat with anyone, but if you didn't get to see the Brands, and Steiners, and Randy Lewis, and Royce Alger, and The Banachs it's probably difficult to understand this movie has already played out, with at least two other dynasties.  If this goes on for another 10 years or so, I will undoubtedly put Cael at the top, but not yet.  I would pay a months salary to watch Bo wrestle Rico or Zain vs Tom, or Nolf vs Lincoln Mac!

 

PS, the year after you beat Billy Martin in the finals, I was his teammate at OSU.  Was Jimmy Carr in your weight one of those years too?

Edited by Peso

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Great point!  Forever we had the big 4 in college wrestling.  OSU, ISU, IU, OU.  I believe Minnesota was the only addition to that group for 50 years, 

don't forget Arizona State's title in the late 80s. Pretty radical for them to win it back then. Much respect to Bobby Douglas.  

Edited by KTG119

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Due to improvements in diet and training athletes are better today than they were when Gable started at Iowa. Any cursory check of objective human athletic accomplishment shows this. Pretty much all measurable achievements have improved.

 

Think track and field, but other sports also. High jump, long jump, sprints, distance running, etc. Skaters are faster. Figure skaters do more turns in the air now. Gymnasts do the same. It is like night and day how much athletes have improved.

 

Wrestlers are no different.

Edited by TBar1977

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Peso,

Jimmy was in the bottom bracket in '75...lost to Reinwand (WI) 5-4 in the quarters.  The domination of Gable/Iowa is very unique.  He had some guys that weren't All-Stars out of hs and developed them into monsters.  Kinseth was a pinning machine.  Davis was tough. Cysewski doesn't get much credit, but he was not a pushover and got better every year.  The Trizzino's...Holm, Yagla, Campbell, DeAnna, Heffernan, the Zalesky's....and the list goes on and on.  The thing is, Iowa didn't just win, they just pounded you. It was like guys playing Tiger at his zenith, they were beat before they ever set foot on the tee...It was intimidating to wrestle an Iowa guy.   It didn't matter how far ahead you might be in the first period, by the third (if you lasted that long) you were exhausted.  At the Big Ten's and NCAA's.. you could always tell when an Iowa guy stuck someone....the place erupted (and they pinned a lot).  And you could always tell when an Iowa kid got beat...the place erupted!  What great time for wresting and for fans. 

Edited by patmilkovich

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Due to improvements in diet and training athletes are better today than they were when Gable started at Iowa. Any cursory check of objective human athletic accomplishment shows this. Pretty much all measurable achievements have improved.

 

Think track and field, but other sports also. High jump, long jump, sprints, distance running, etc. Skaters are faster. Figure skaters do more turns in the air now. Gymnasts do the same. It is like night and day how much athletes have improved.

 

Wrestlers are no different.

 

Lol, drives ya crazy, doesn't it?  How dare someone suggest PSU isn't the best in any way.  Heck, suggest ANYTHING about PSU in ANY way isn't the best.  You simply can't handle it, can you?

I can just imagine you grinding your teeth at the deviation from your company line.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Due to improvements in diet and training athletes are better today than they were when Gable started at Iowa. Any cursory check of objective human athletic accomplishment shows this. Pretty much all measurable achievements have improved.

 

Think track and field, but other sports also. High jump, long jump, sprints, distance running, etc. Skaters are faster. Figure skaters do more turns in the air now. Gymnasts do the same. It is like night and day how much athletes have improved.

 

Wrestlers are no different.

well that is one way to look at it, and one factor that makes comparing wrestlers/teams from different eras great for a discussion topic, but ultimately impossible to prove. another way to look at it is to play with the idea of the best from a past era having those same benefits (nutrition, training, etc) and imagine them lining up on equal footing with the guys of today.

 

but back to your point and assuming past guys step straight out of the time machine with only the skill set and training from their era to compete against today's guys.....how far back do you go and say, yep, anything before this period of time and the guys would get killed by today's stars? Would Kolat/mid 90s be competitive? Tom Brands/early 90s? John Smith/late 80s? Randy Lewis/early 80s? 

 

or maybe one future day (10 years? 20 years?) you'll have to admit that Taylor, Zain, Nolf, Ruth, etc are products of an outdated era and that the current crop of guys would crush them.    

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

another thought on this, and I was guilty of this for a long time....personal bias and perspective....I got into the sport in the early 80s so moving forward always felt like my early heroes would have been able to hang....but those guys from the 70s? No way, that was old school

 

except Gable of course, cause you know he was still running through everyone in the Iowa room like a bat out of hell. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

KTG, you mention things like a)there are different ways of looking at things and b) there is no way of proving it ...etc. I agree with both sentiments. Things are just different in too many ways to know.

 

My sense is that with fewer schools combined with more film of all the top recruits the talent tends to just be more concentrated today. Which dynasty is better, or greater, or accomplished more? Does it matter?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

KTG, you mention things like a)there are different ways of looking at things and b) there is no way of proving it ...etc. I agree with both sentiments. Things are just different in too many ways to know.

 

My sense is that with fewer schools combined with more film of all the top recruits the talent tends to just be more concentrated today. Which dynasty is better, or greater, or accomplished more? Does it matter?

and I agree....doesn't really matter. all you can definitively say is who won it and when, who was best in their specific year or era. comparing from different eras can make for a fun discussion topic but at the end of the day that's all it is, discussion. no way to know for sure.

Edited by KTG119

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Due to improvements in diet and training athletes are better today than they were when Gable started at Iowa. Any cursory check of objective human athletic accomplishment shows this. Pretty much all measurable achievements have improved.

 

Think track and field, but other sports also. High jump, long jump, sprints, distance running, etc. Skaters are faster. Figure skaters do more turns in the air now. Gymnasts do the same. It is like night and day how much athletes have improved.

 

Wrestlers are no different.

Some athletes would be great in any era, because they are just wired to be the best.  

 

Sometimes breaking a barrier opens the floodgates.  No one broke 4 minutes in the mile before Bannister, but many did in the next few years.  At least 1300 have done it since 1954.

 

Sometimes time just stands still:  You mentioned long jump.  Bob Beamon jumped 29' 2 1/2" in 1968.  Mike Powell broke it in 1991 with his 29' 4 1/4".   Powell still holds that record after 27 years, and only he has exceeded Beamon's jump in 50 years.  

 

Take those Gable athletes, put them in present day and give them time to train with modern methods, and they'd be as formidable as any of the current stars.

 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Some athletes would be great in any era, because they are just wired to be the best.

 

Sometimes breaking a barrier opens the floodgates. No one broke 4 minutes in the mile before Bannister, but many did in the next few years. At least 1300 have done it since 1954.

 

Sometimes time just stands still: You mentioned long jump. Bob Beamon jumped 29' 2 1/2" in 1968. Mike Powell broke it in 1991 with his 29' 4 1/4". Powell still holds that record after 27 years, and only he has exceeded Beamon's jump in 50 years.

 

Take those Gable athletes, put them in present day and give them time to train with modern methods, and they'd be as formidable as any of the current stars.

 

 

I basically agree they would be very successful, but no telling one way or the other if they are better than other champions. Just no way to know.

 

People who consider themselves experts guess wrong about athletic outcomes with regularity.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Some athletes would be great in any era, because they are just wired to be the best. 

Take those Gable athletes, put them in present day and give them time to train with modern methods, and they'd be as formidable as any of the current stars.

 

They might even whup today's kids because they were better on the mat. In this heavily FS dominated era it seems like many of the top wrestlers struggle on the mat.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm agreeing with Pat as well. 180 teams participating = fewer teams stockpiling the talent. Had to be harder to win back in those days in many respects.

Absolutely correct. Is it harder beating one opponent or fifty?

Only a fool (I’m looking at you, Tidiot) would suggest otherwise.

Statistically speaking, it’s not close.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Great point!  Forever we had the big 4 in college wrestling.  OSU, ISU, IU, OU.  I believe Minnesota was the only addition to that group for 50 years, but Cael + Pennsylvania = mo-betta.  I believe JRob was a bigger influence in Iowa City than most realize.  Then of course, his first thought, much less first vote, hall of fame career in Minnesota is a lifetime accomplishment that probably passes or equals the great Harold Nichols from Iowa State, or Tommy Evans from OU...

Before Gary Kurdelmeier with Dan Gable as assistant took Iowa to the NCAA title in 1974 - Iowa had never won it all. ISU was the top dog in Iowa to that point with 6 NCAA titles before Iowa won its first. The Titles for the Cyclones were it for Iowa schools til the Squawkeyes got the coaching right. After that Iowa became a dominating presence in the NCAA. Before that it was OSU and those who would occasionally beat them.

 

OSU still leads with Iowa in second place and Penn State taking up the challenge now. Penn State under Cael is looking a lot like Iowa under Dan Gable - forging a legend and legacy under a Coach who is an unstoppable force in his own right. No question who is #1 and the target of every other program out there.

 

Say what you will but a solid target to shoot at is good for the sport. When  you beat that top dog you have accomplished something more than when you are one of five in the hunt.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm agreeing with Pat as well. 180 teams participating = fewer teams stockpiling the talent. Had to be harder to win back in those days in many respects.

 

 

How is it harder because the talent is spread out? Wouldn't it be easier? If only Iowa could truly stockpile talent (thinking of their creative use of scholarships) back in those days, with the remainder spread out over many teams, then no single team is likely to be as close to Iowa merely due to the spreading out of talent. Thus, all else being equal, they should have won. 

 

Today PSU isn't the only school stockpiling talent. I think we could all agree that Ohio State, and to a slightly lesser degree of late Iowa and Oklahoma State also stockpile talent. PSU doesn't have to beat 150 weak teams, just 75 or so. But they have to beat 3 or 4 other strong teams as well, whereas Iowa's main competition could not stockpile as much and thus were relatively not as strong. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How is it harder because the talent is spread out? Wouldn't it be easier? If only Iowa could truly stockpile talent (thinking of their creative use of scholarships) back in those days, with the remainder spread out over many teams, then no single team is likely to be as close to Iowa merely due to the spreading out of talent. Thus, all else being equal, they should have won. 

 

Today PSU isn't the only school stockpiling talent. I think we could all agree that Ohio State, and to a slightly lesser degree of late Iowa and Oklahoma State also stockpile talent. PSU doesn't have to beat 150 weak teams, just 75 or so. But they have to beat 3 or 4 other strong teams as well, whereas Iowa's main competition could not stockpile as much and thus were relatively not as strong. 

 

I'd say the talent to be split between 180 teams would be spread a lot thinner than today with 70 ish teams. Also I'd think with 180 teams to choose from that it would be more difficult to recruit a guy to any particular school. That's pretty much the only reason I think it was harder back then than now. But to be completely honest, there was usually only a team or two even in Iowa's ballpark back then: usually they rolled everybody.

Edited by TobusRex

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Was it harder to win NCAA's at 165 or 285?

I would say it was harder to WIN 285, but easier to AA.

I would say it was easier to WIN 165, but harder to AA.

 

I would also say back then it was harder to place amongst the top 10 teams, but harder to WIN now.

Edited by BigTenFanboy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×