Jump to content
Jimmy Cinnabon

2 of Stieber's NCAA titles came in controversial fashion

Recommended Posts

1. The "no TD" call vs Jordan Oliver where Oliver had both of Stieber's legs and Stieber was seated flat on his butt.  100% would be called a TD today.

2. Finals vs Tony Ramos where Ramos had Stieber on his back, possibly pinned even, but at least for a 2 count.  Yet no backpoints were awarded.

 

Stieber is still a 4x champ, but 2 of his titles came in very controversial fashion.  Perhaps he should have been a 2x champ, 2x finalist. Much like David Taylor.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Jimmy Cinnabon said:

1. The "no TD" call vs Jordan Oliver where Oliver had both of Stieber's legs and Stieber was seated flat on his butt.  100% would be called a TD today.

2. Finals vs Tony Ramos where Ramos had Stieber on his back, possibly pinned even, but at least for a 2 count.  Yet no backpoints were awarded.

 

Stieber is still a 4x champ, but 2 of his titles came in very controversial fashion.  Perhaps he should have been a 2x champ, 2x finalist. Much like David Taylor.

How would you rank the four timers?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Katie said:

How would you rank the four timers?

1. Cael, only undefeated 4 timer

2. Dake, especially given that he took out another all time great in Taylor, and did it in 4 different weight classes

3. Pat Smith

4. Stieber, for the reasons above

Edited by Jimmy Cinnabon

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Jimmy Cinnabon said:

1. Cael, only undefeated 4 timer

2. Dake, especially given that he took out another all time great in Taylor, and did it in 4 different weight classes

3. Pat Smith

4. Stieber, for the reasons above

Now what about an all-time top 5? Certainly someone like Uetake makes the cut, right?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Jimmy Cinnabon said:

1. Cael, only undefeated 4 timer

2. Dake, especially given that he took out another all time great in Taylor, and did it in 4 different weight classes

3. Pat Smith

4. Stieber, for the reasons above

I see Dake's big four credentials as, in order, no redshirt; going up and beating Taylor; overall quality of finals opponents; four different weight classes.

The no redshirt is particularly significant because we don't know if the others would/could have done it (granted Smith did wrestle as true freshman).  I almost look at this as a different category for Dake (not necessarily making him better than Cael, but different) that for now he has to himself (looking at you, Spencer and Yianni).  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Jimmy Cinnabon said:

1. The "no TD" call vs Jordan Oliver where Oliver had both of Stieber's legs and Stieber was seated flat on his butt.  100% would be called a TD today.

2. Finals vs Tony Ramos where Ramos had Stieber on his back, possibly pinned even, but at least for a 2 count.  Yet no backpoints were awarded.

 

Stieber is still a 4x champ, but 2 of his titles came in very controversial fashion.  Perhaps he should have been a 2x champ, 4x finalist. Much like David Taylor.

Fify

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, Jimmy Cinnabon said:

1. The "no TD" call vs Jordan Oliver where Oliver had both of Stieber's legs and Stieber was seated flat on his butt.  100% would be called a TD today.

2. Finals vs Tony Ramos where Ramos had Stieber on his back, possibly pinned even, but at least for a 2 count.  Yet no backpoints were awarded.

 

Stieber is still a 4x champ, but 2 of his titles came in very controversial fashion.  Perhaps he should have been a 2x champ, 2x finalist. Much like David Taylor.

At the end of the day he still has his titles, controversial or not in the record books he is the champ.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, Jimmy Cinnabon said:

1. The "no TD" call vs Jordan Oliver where Oliver had both of Stieber's legs and Stieber was seated flat on his butt.  100% would be called a TD today.

2. Finals vs Tony Ramos where Ramos had Stieber on his back, possibly pinned even, but at least for a 2 count.  Yet no backpoints were awarded.

 

Stieber is still a 4x champ, but 2 of his titles came in very controversial fashion.  Perhaps he should have been a 2x champ, 2x finalist. Much like David Taylor.

He beat Ramos by 3 didn't he? No back points awarded, but there was a ton of match left and Ramos couldn't: 1. Get out from bottom to avoid the riding time point. 2. get to the legs and score again. I would have loved to have seen Ramos win that one, but outside of the one takedown and possible back points, Stieber really controlled the entire match. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, drag it said:

I see Dake's big four credentials as, in order, no redshirt; going up and beating Taylor; overall quality of finals opponents; four different weight classes.

The no redshirt is particularly significant because we don't know if the others would/could have done it (granted Smith did wrestle as true freshman).  I almost look at this as a different category for Dake (not necessarily making him better than Cael, but different) that for now he has to himself (looking at you, Spencer and Yianni).  

I get why it matters that Dake never redshirted and that he had good wins (including Taylor).

But why does it matter that he competed at four different weight classes?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, Katie said:

I get why it matters that Dake never redshirted and that he had good wins (including Taylor).

But why does it matter that he competed at four different weight classes?

 

I think the four weight class factor is significant and not just because it's an anomaly. It shows that Dake was still a kid when he won as a freshman. He still had a lot of growing to do. Some college freshmen are full grown men. Dake was not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, Katie said:

I get why it matters that Dake never redshirted and that he had good wins (including Taylor).

But why does it matter that he competed at four different weight classes?

 

I'm not sure that it doesn't matter at all, but I don't think it's very important, which is why I intentionally put my four factors in order and had the four weight classes issue dead last.  

As I said in another post last week, I think that it's unfortunate (at least for purposes of the who's the GOAT discussion) that the 4 weight classes thing has over the years been the most well known aspect of his championships, since it really doesn't tell you much about who's the best. 

I assume it became such a point of emphasis because people like trivia, and it's interesting trivia.  It was good marketing to emphasize it while he was wrestling -- it did help spark interest. 

And it's nor irrelevant as a point on the merits re GOAT.  He was able to beat four different fields of people at four different sizes (and the differences in style that come along with that).  And it demonstrates that he was confident enough in himself that he was willing to wrestle where his body was going and take on bigger, stronger guys rather than cut a ton of weight as he got older (particularly the last year where he apparently didn't really even cut -- and he beat the Hodge winner three times).  It does say something positive about his versatility as a wrestler that he was able to do it. 

But I see winning four weight classes (by itself anyway) as a less persuasive fact in the argument over GOAT than other factors, and far less persuasive than no redshirt.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, drag it said:

I'm not sure that it doesn't matter at all, but I don't think it's very important, which is why I intentionally put my four factors in order and had the four weight classes issue dead last.  

As I said in another post last week, I think that it's unfortunate (at least for purposes of the who's the GOAT discussion) that the 4 weight classes thing has over the years been the most well known aspect of his championships, since it really doesn't tell you much about who's the best. 

I assume it became such a point of emphasis because people like trivia, and it's interesting trivia.  It was good marketing to emphasize it while he was wrestling -- it did help spark interest. 

And it's nor irrelevant as a point on the merits re GOAT.  He was able to beat four different fields of people at four different sizes (and the differences in style that come along with that).  And it demonstrates that he was confident enough in himself that he was willing to wrestle where his body was going and take on bigger, stronger guys rather than cut a ton of weight as he got older (particularly the last year where he apparently didn't really even cut -- and he beat the Hodge winner three times).  It does say something positive about his versatility as a wrestler that he was able to do it. 

But I see winning four weight classes (by itself anyway) as a less persuasive fact in the argument over GOAT than other factors, and far less persuasive than no redshirt.  

 

I don't see an appreciable difference in styles between 141 and 165.

I also don't think it's necessarily more difficult to win a title up a weight class.  For instance, this year Nickal might have had tougher competition at 184.  IMO, what really matters is who you actually beat. 

It seems weird to me that so many people hype up this four-different-weight-classes thing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with the four weight classes being overblown.  Its not like he won them all at the same time weighing less than everyone else, like boxers have been known to do, so that they have two belts at the same time.  He was the same size as everyone else he was wrestling, maybe cutting harder than most at 141 and less than some when he was 165.

I do think the #2 ranking is appropriate, mainly for beating Taylor and not redshirting.  He has a few "bad" losses that keep him a good distance away from Cael at #1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, Katie said:

 

I don't see an appreciable difference in styles between 141 and 165.

I also don't think it's necessarily more difficult to win a title up a weight class.  For instance, this year Nickal might have had tougher competition at 184.  IMO, what really matters is who you actually beat. 

It seems weird to me that so many people hype up this four-different-weight-classes thing.

We totally agree on the main question -- whether the 4 weights is overblown.  I think it was a very successful marketing point during his last two years for all involved, so it took on a life of his own.

I would quibble with you on no appreciable difference in styles between 141 and 165.  I compare, for instance, the Yianni-Demas, Yianni-Eierman, and Yianni-McKenna matches with, on the other hand, the Marinelli-Lewis, Marinelli-Marsteller, and Joseph-Lewis matches, and the finesse vs power differences seem pretty stark.  Those 165 pounders are incredible hulks, whereas Yianni is smooth as glass, those two takedowns he got against Demas were literally artistic.  No one at 141 is nicknamed Bull; at 165 the guy named Bull got repeatedly bulled in Pittsburgh.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, drag it said:

We totally agree on the main question -- whether the 4 weights is overblown.  I think it was a very successful marketing point during his last two years for all involved, so it took on a life of his own.

I would quibble with you on no appreciable difference in styles between 141 and 165.  I compare, for instance, the Yianni-Demas, Yianni-Eierman, and Yianni-McKenna matches with, on the other hand, the Marinelli-Lewis, Marinelli-Marsteller, and Joseph-Lewis matches, and the finesse vs power differences seem pretty stark.  Those 165 pounders are incredible hulks, whereas Yianni is smooth as glass, those two takedowns he got against Demas were literally artistic.  No one at 141 is nicknamed Bull; at 165 the guy named Bull got repeatedly bulled in Pittsburgh.  

Taylor was pretty lean in college, and he was Dake’s main competition at 165.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Stieber did win 6-3 but the 2 pt nearfall which Ramos didn't get would make  it 6-5 with time on the clock and a takedown wins it. They went into overtime in the big 10 finals.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Jim L said:

I agree with the four weight classes being overblown.  Its not like he won them all at the same time weighing less than everyone else, like boxers have been known to do, so that they have two belts at the same time.  He was the same size as everyone else he was wrestling, maybe cutting harder than most at 141 and less than some when he was 165.

I do think the #2 ranking is appropriate, mainly for beating Taylor and not redshirting.  He has a few "bad" losses that keep him a good distance away from Cael at #1

Playing devil's advocate here, but when you look at the last few years of 141-165 range of NCAA winners, and then "project" who could beat who, it becomes evident very quickly that what Dake did was absolutely "special".  

Just looking at this most recent season (assuming the opponents were catchweight or whatever):

* Could Yianni beat Ashnault?  Nolf?  Mekhi?

* Could Ashnault beat Yianni?  Nolf?  Mekhi?

* Could Nolf beat Yianni? Ashnault?  Mekhi?

* Could Mekhi beat Yianni?  Ashnault?  Nolf?

Stylistic changes, body type changes, strength changes, etc. etc. etc.  Is it overblown?  Maybe, because it had never been done.  Should it be undersold?  I don't think so.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, Katie said:

Taylor was pretty lean in college, and he was Dake’s main competition at 165.

Yes, and further to the argument you're making there, title #2, Molinaro, was a muscular 149 pounder and St. John, title #3, was long and lanky. 

But it seems to me that waving off the four weight classes as completely meaningless is overly dismissive.  It shows versatility and fearlessness, particularly the last year.  And the mere fact that so many people in the sport (including the athlete himself) thought it was significant tells me that it's not meaningless. 

I just think it's taken on a substantially outsized significance and obscured the very significant fact that Dake was a four year, not a five year, college athlete (no greyshirt either).  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, treep2000 said:

Playing devil's advocate here, but when you look at the last few years of 141-165 range of NCAA winners, and then "project" who could beat who, it becomes evident very quickly that what Dake did was absolutely "special".  

Just looking at this most recent season (assuming the opponents were catchweight or whatever):

* Could Yianni beat Ashnault?  Nolf?  Mekhi?

* Could Ashnault beat Yianni?  Nolf?  Mekhi?

* Could Nolf beat Yianni? Ashnault?  Mekhi?

* Could Mekhi beat Yianni?  Ashnault?  Nolf?

Stylistic changes, body type changes, strength changes, etc. etc. etc.  Is it overblown?  Maybe, because it had never been done.  Should it be undersold?  I don't think so.

Exactly.  It means something, and is further evidence that this is a very special athlete,  but it's very hard to quantify.  Thus it's not nearly as tangible, and to me as important, a fact in the great GOAT debate as him winning the national championship against all comers in his first four years straight out of high school.  

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

×