I'll repeat: The author has some issues with middle America, Christianity, etc.
As stated earlier in the thread, it was written for a politics section of an intellectual magazine. I agree that the biases were palpable, but I don't think that diminished the quality of the piece - if anything it made for a more contextualized read. It also made it less likely that it would be embraced by people reading for sports content, which it wasn't written for. He states pretty clearly that he was raised in a more privileged place than the post-industrial Middle American hotbed of American Wrestling, and other implications suggest that he's deeply conflicted by the embrace that those familiar places have shown of a new, unusually confident political leader. Do you think that his biases make his observations less valuable, or are they just irritating?
As for hubris, I think the closest action we saw to that was Snyder's Instagram post standing arms outstretched over a stunned Sadulaev, lying on his back defeated, with the caption "undisputed" - a specific reference in the article. I don't think that this qualifies as hubris, but it's the closest thing to rubbing Sadulaev's nose in it, which would fit one definition: excessive pride of the perpetrator and at the cost of the victim. The difference that I see is that I don't think Snyder's pride is challenging the gods or is greater than life, but rather he's solely challenging his opponent while giving glory to God. For context, his Instagram post was one of a series that he made in the days after his huge victory, which I don't think is unexpected or outside of cultural norms (at least American norms).
I love being a fan of Snyder, but I was with the majority of fans, as I remember it, NOT picking him to beat Sadulaev that month. I totally enjoyed his celebration in the days after. Looking back on those posts, and thinking about some of Snyder's other posts (particularly ahead of the PSU dual), I see a young man who is clearly committed to his craft growing into his role as his country's leader in it. He says things that are expected from 21yr old guys, guys who are probably going to be humiliated a few times before they become more articulate. I guess that's the purpose of Nemesis, and of the Icarus parable. What I hate about the author's Icarus assertion is the implication that Snyder is due for an epic fall, one which he would not recover from. As other posters have noted, Snyder takes an occasional loss. He also goes through growing pains where he doesn't pin Nevils, and his team loses after he makes young-man comments ensuring the opposite.
jcjcjc, I appreciate the poem you linked to, where Icarus fell and nobody really cared or noticed. I think it's a stretch to say that's the kind of reference that the writer was making, though. A lengthy piece like this could have afforded a few phrases to make that distinction if it were the intention. I think it was common hyperbole in the context of all the cultural associations and the political issues vaguely referenced - where people observing the exact same scene are often interpreting drastically different meanings.