Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Jimmy Cinnabon

Looking back, was Nolf really that great?

Recommended Posts

4 minutes ago, TBar1977 said:

 

Uh, that is bullcrap.

The thread was a troll job on whether Jason Nolf with his 3 NCAA titles and only 2 true career losses was "all that great". You are the one who made a big deal about one match, and you did it to knock Nolf down a peg. Really, REALLY, weak. 

This is the hill you're gonna die on? Nolf wasn't among the greatest? No serious wrestling journalist is ever going to agree with that tripe. 

I have said nothing but compliments regarding Nolf. Go back and read. I have only been talking about the significance  of his match in the semis when people want to sweep it under the rug as no big deal, and then my subjective opinion on the verbage of "one of the greatest of all time". You cant handle that my thinking doesnt align with yours even though I never said Nolf was not "All that great".

 

Share this post


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

That would be because, as I said,  I'm not going to continue to argue over what is a little vs what is a lot.  For example, my concern for whether or not "little" is placed in front of the word "controversy" is.....little.  Your concern on the other hand is apparently...a lot.  And I don't see the need to continue the argument because it is very much a bigger deal for you than me, and that's great, we all have our little things we like to focus on, so I won't get in the way of that.

I will however continue with sarcasm and smart ass comments. Those are always fun!!

 

Well yeah, I think words have meaning.. I must be crazy. Funny, you dont care at all appearantly, but insist on trying to attack my method of arguement instead of actually defending a stance. Bravo sir!

6 minutes ago, Lurker said:

And I don't see the need to continue the argument because it is very much a bigger deal for you than me

But you very much will stay here and try so hard to attack me, and paint me as a pathetic over carer, in hopes that everyone will not realize that you still, in 3 posts now, did not answer the question.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Lurker said:

I'm not going to continue to argue over what is a little vs what is a lot.  For example, my concern for whether or not "little" is placed in front of the word "controversy" 

It means a lot though when the degree of that incident is used in your arguement to take a stance on legacy. Words have meaning.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, russelscout said:

I have said nothing but compliments regarding Nolf. Go back and read. I have only been talking about the significance  of his match in the semis when people want to sweep it under the rug as no big deal, and then my subjective opinion on the verbage of "one of the greatest of all time". You cant handle that my thinking doesnt align with yours even though I never said Nolf was not "All that great".

Not sweeping anything under the rug. Nolf beat Hidlay for the second time in a row, so nothing to sweep under.  Your opinion of Nolf seems unduly impacted because he had a close win over Hidlay. Guess what, Kyle Dake had lots of close wins. 

You are a pretty typically transparent Penn State hater. 

Edited by TBar1977

Share this post


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

It means a lot though when the degree of that incident is used in your arguement to take a stance on legacy. Words have meaning.

Nolf has 2 career losses, both being by 1 point to a man who you personally just described as one of the greatest college wrestler of all time. I think his legacy as one of the greatest himself is solid. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Being over dramatic does not help you.  I will try to not attack you so hard from now on.  

For the record, and to soften up my attacks on you, I will answer the irrelevent question (as there were plenty of big stories, and this wasn't the biggest),  yes it was a one of the big stories coming out of NCAA's.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, TBar1977 said:

Not sweeping anything under the rug. Nolf beat Hidlay for the second time in a row, so nothing to sweep under.  Your opinion of Nolf seems unduly impacted because he had a close win over Hidlay. Guess what, Kyle Dake had lots of close wins. 

You are a pretty typically transparent Penn State hater. 

Show me the screw job that was equivalent to that semi? Call was correct, went to review and changed it. By Nolfs own admission it was a terrible call. Lets not pretend it wasnt a thing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Lurker said:

Being over dramatic does not help you.  I will try to not attack you so hard from now on.  

Nice. Bow out with some class Lurker, you were wrong. You dont need to paint me as a softy, like you are taking it easy on me, as you grab your ball and go home.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, TBar1977 said:

Nolf has 2 career losses, both being by 1 point to a man who you personally just described as one of the greatest college wrestler of all time. I think his legacy as one of the greatest himself is solid. 

No i didnt. I said Imar was on the list of two timers... i didnt say he was one of the greatest.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, russelscout said:

Nice. Bow out with some class Lurker, you were wrong. You dont need to paint me as a softy, like you are taking it easy on me, as you grab your ball and go home.

Man....I finally answered the question you were so desperate for, and you cut it out when quoting me.  That's rough.  Who's being hard on who now???

Share this post


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

Show me the screw job that was equivalent to that semi? Call was correct, went to review and changed it. By Nolfs own admission it was a terrible call. Lets not pretend it wasnt a thing.

Look, this is obviously pretty important to you.  You seem to be on some kind of crusade to make this important to others, lest they wrongly believe Jason Nolf was indeed one of the greatest college wrestlers. Its not really something on my radar when I consider Nolf's career. 

Keep on fixating over it if it makes you feel good. 

Share this post


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

I don't know if I've said this before, but certainly have thought it.  I think it needs to be acknowledged that @russelscout actually has @TBar1977 and myself on the same side of something.  Anyone that spends any time around here has to realize how extremely profound that is!!

Well you guys are talking about 2 different things, but whatever, ok.... doesnt make you any less wrong man.

Share this post


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

Man....I finally answered the question you were so desperate for, and you cut it out when quoting me.  That's rough.  Who's being hard on who now???

 

5 minutes ago, Lurker said:

Being over dramatic does not help you.  I will try to not attack you so hard from now on.  

For the record, and to soften up my attacks on you, I will answer the irrelevent question (as there were plenty of big stories, and this wasn't the biggest),  yes it was a one of the big stories coming out of NCAA's.  

There you go? Happy? Thanks for taking it easy on me Lurker... lord knows Im so sensitive....... but yeah, you were still wrong.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, TBar1977 said:

Look, this is obviously pretty important to you.  You seem to be on some kind of crusade to make this important to others, lest they wrongly believe Jason Nolf was indeed one of the greatest college wrestlers. Its not really something on my radar when I consider Nolf's career. 

Keep on fixating over it if it makes you feel good. 

So important! AHHH IT FEELS SOOOOO GOOD TBAR!

Share this post


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

Well you guys are talking about 2 different things, but whatever, ok.... doesnt make you any less wrong man.

Actually we are not.  We are both talking about the significance of three seconds and a questionable call on someone's four year careeer.

YOU are talking about two different things with us....definitions of "a little" and "one of".  

 

(Just take this post with a grain of salt, I'm a bully)

Share this post


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

Actually we are not.  We are both talking about the significance of three seconds and a questionable call on someone's four year careeer.

YOU are talking about two different things with us....definitions of "a little" and "one of".  

 

(Just take this post with a grain of salt, I'm a bully)

Big bad bully you are! I can say this Lurker, there are few on themat.com who are as thoroughly pleased by themselves as you are.

Doesnt change the fact it was a horrible call that never should have been overturned. Ever. Ive also been pretty consistent with that one. I also said that he has a highlight reel that will hold his legacy going forward.... what else do you want from me? Oh thats right, complete agreement. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, russelscout said:

Big bad bully you are! I can say this Lurker, there are few on themat.com who are as thoroughly pleased by themselves as you are.

Doesnt change the fact it was a horrible call that never should have been overturned. Ever. Ive also been pretty consistent with that one. I also said that he has a highlight reel that will hold his legacy going forward.... what else do you want from me? Oh thats right, complete agreement. 

No, I didn't want complete agreement, just wanted you to find something else to argue about, other than the term "little".  Which you have.  So once again, all is fair and just.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Lurker said:

No, I didn't want complete agreement, just wanted you to find something else to argue about, other than the term "little".  Which you have.  So once again, all is fair and just.

But you did admit you were wrong to say it was a little controversy right? Because as we have established it was more than little. I mean its such an insignificant word, should be no skin off your nose to admit that your were wrong in the way you phrased that, and to do so is a tad misleading.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, russelscout said:

But you did admit you were wrong to say it was a little controversy right? Because as we have established it was more than little. I mean its such an insignificant word, should be no skin off your nose to admit that your were wrong in the way you phrased that, and to do so is a tad misleading.

Not admitting I was wrong to say it

No we haven't established anything other than your belief I was wrong for calling it in fact a controversy, but that my level of description of how much of a controversy was not acceptable to your standards.  That's all that has been established. And as I said to you a looooooooooong time ago.  That's fine.  We all have different things we focus on.

I will say I find it interesting that you are saying things like "I mean its such an insignificant word", and also forcing the idea that all I care about is you agreeing with me, while I also said a looooong time ago it is not as significant to me as it is to you so I don't really care to debate it, yet you keep going, and going, and going......

Edited by Lurker

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Lurker said:

will say I find it interesting that you are saying things like "I mean its such an insignificant word", and also forcing the idea that all I care about is you agreeing with me,

Im trying to stay consistent with your line of thinking, as you were the one suggesting the insignificance of the word little and how silly to argue over such a thing.

7 minutes ago, Lurker said:

No we haven't established anything other than your belief I was wrong for calling it in fact a controversy, but that my level of description of how much of a controversy was not acceptable to your standards.

And you still see it as just a little controversy although it was, by your own admission, one of the biggest stories of the NCAAs? If that is not enough to reach that status beyond a "little controversy", what would it take?

Edited by russelscout

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, russelscout said:

Im trying to stay consistent with your line of thinking, as you were the one suggesting the insignificance of the word little and how silly to argue over such a thing.

And you still see it as just a little controversy although it was, by your own admission, one of the biggest stories of the NCAAs? If that is enough to reach that status beyond a "little controversy", what would it take?

and going.....and going....and going....

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...