Jump to content
TripNSweep

Lesnar and how good was he?

Recommended Posts

On ‎9‎/‎23‎/‎2019 at 2:11 AM, TripNSweep said:

I had a conversation with somebody about this.  So I figured why not put it out in the open.  His position is that Lesnar was a great wrestler because he was an NCAA champion and had over 100 wins in college.  My opinion is that Lesnar wasn't that great, due to his limited technical skills and that he didn't face a lot of particularly talented wrestlers in college.  The year after he finished 2nd to Neal, all of the other All Americans at heavyweight graduated.  To me this means that he managed to win the next year because he was the next guy up.  My friend contends that being able to win NCAAs and have over 100 wins means he was good.  Of his few losses in college, one was to Wes Hand, the other to Neal, and in juco he had a few losses, I know one was where he got majored or tech falled by Vlad Matyushenko.  Despite his winning % in college and his NCAA title, I don't feel he is really an elite heavyweight wrestler.  So what do you think?  

His D1 hwt losses were to Neal, Hyneck and Hand.

In 2000 (his championship year) half of the AA's were a previous AA.  Lesnar, Hand, Adenyi-Bada, and Hyneck.  Lockhart was the NCAA champ the next year.

I did a quick count of returning AA's through the 90's

Year- Returning AA's

1991-2

1992-4

1993-2

1994-1

1995-3

1996-4

1997-4

1998-4

1999-2

2000-4

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wrestled Hand, Lesnar, and Mocco. Lesnar beat my ass the worst. I had nothing for him. I could get to the legs of Hand and Mocco, Lesnar would just side step and I’d miss completely. Now all three were in a practice situation, and Lesnar was when I was my youngest, but all I kept thinking was wow, this guy is amazing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, jchapman said:

Thirteen individuals have won 285 in the last 20 years, so it would be pretty hard for him to not even make the top 15. 

If you go conservative and say Rowlands, Mocco, Konrad, Nelson, Gwiz, and Snyder are clearly ahead of Lesnar, that means you think at least four of the following were better in order for Lesnar to not make the top 10:  Lockart, Fox, Ellis, Zabriskie, Rey, Cassar.

 

I would give my left nut to see Lesnar v. Cassar. 

Share this post


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

I'd rather see him wrestle Rowlands, Gwiazdowski, Snyder, or Mocco honestly.  

Those would be crazy to see too. But Cassar and Lesnar are two of the most shredded, athletic, explosive heavyweights of the bunch imo, I think that match would be fireworks. Snyder and Lesnar would be wild too, but I think Snyder gives Lesnar fits with his style.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, mg113 said:

Those would be crazy to see too. But Cassar and Lesnar are two of the most shredded, athletic, explosive heavyweights of the bunch imo, I think that match would be fireworks. Snyder and Lesnar would be wild too, but I think Snyder gives Lesnar fits with his style.

I think that the only guys Lesnar would definitely beat out of the last 20 years are Fox and Lockhart.  Maybe Zabriskie too.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Fletcher said:

His nickname was the Bronze Statue and it was not meant as a compliment. Snyder would tech fall him.

He faltered when he faced elite talent.  Fortunately for him there weren't many guys who you could call that during his 2 year run.  He really was in a good era for him, because the next year Crump, Lowney and Rowlands would have all beaten him.  Lowney was on the same team, but he was a much better wrestler.  Lockhart I think he would have gone at least 50/50 with or been able to beat more often than not. I realize it's kind of silly to say somebody was the "worst" NCAA champion, but Lockhart winning the coin toss 4 times in a row.... 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, TripNSweep said:

He faltered when he faced elite talent.  Fortunately for him there weren't many guys who you could call that during his 2 year run.  He really was in a good era for him, because the next year Crump, Lowney and Rowlands would have all beaten him.  Lowney was on the same team, but he was a much better wrestler.  Lockhart I think he would have gone at least 50/50 with or been able to beat more often than not. I realize it's kind of silly to say somebody was the "worst" NCAA champion, but Lockhart winning the coin toss 4 times in a row.... 

Lowney was an animal. I seem to recall something about a neck injury that may have hampered his career.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Fletcher said:

Lowney was an animal. I seem to recall something about a neck injury that may have hampered his career.

He hurt his neck in the Olympics, I think against Ljuneberg from Sweden but I could be wrong.  He did have a great run that year.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, TripNSweep said:

 He really was in a good era for him, because the next year Crump, Lowney and Rowlands would have all beaten him.  Lowney was on the same team, but he was a much better wrestler.

What makes you so sure of this?  Lesnar had wins over Crump and Lockhart.  Lowney had over 20 losses in college, some to guys that Lesnar defeated.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Big Nasty said:


When I was in 8th grade my wrestling coach gave a copy of this article to everyone on the team.  I find it interesting that JRob had Brock preemptedly tested for PEDS at the time. 

https://www.si.com/vault/2000/03/06/275618/very-big-man-on-campus-minnesota-heavyweight-brock-lesnar-makes-rivals-look-lilliputian

Lance Armstrong, Marion Jones, and Carl Lewis also never tested positive.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, olddirty said:

What makes you so sure of this?  Lesnar had wins over Crump and Lockhart.  Lowney had over 20 losses in college, some to guys that Lesnar defeated.

Lowney had a serious neck injury from the Olympics that left him unable to really compete at a high level.  I believe he finally called it quits after 2 or 3 seasons of college wrestling.  The Lowney that we saw competing in college was about 70% of how good he really was.  Even that 70% was a lot better than Lesnar.  

Share this post


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

Which then gives you carte blanche to claim whomever you want.

Just pointing out that we have a poor system for catching cheaters. Until there's a better way, I'll rely on common sense (e.g. how can a clean cyclist win the tour year after year over known juicers?) and the eye test (e.g. everyone in the WWE).

Share this post


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

e.g. how can a clean cyclist win the tour year after year over known juicers?

He had a better bike?

But seriously, it wasn't just that Lance was cheating he had an entire team system that was better than all the other cheaters and they still didn't get caught ... well not till after winning 7 tours.

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...

×
×
  • Create New...