Jump to content
TBar1977

Flo 2019-2020 College Rankings

Recommended Posts

Couple of thoughts...

1) I don't have many gripes--everyone looks to be more or less where they should be based on folkstyle results last year.  

2) There are a lot of redshirt freshmen currently ranked outside of the top 8 that I think most of us expect to AA, and the #6 - #14 range at a lot of these weight is going to be extremely competitive.

3) 141 is WIDE open, and I love Dom Demas but I gotta think he's the favorite for first #1 to drop a match.  

4) David Carr is winning 157, right?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, steamboat_charlie v2 said:

Couple of thoughts...

1) I don't have many gripes--everyone looks to be more or less where they should be based on folkstyle results last year.  

2) There are a lot of redshirt freshmen currently ranked outside of the top 8 that I think most of us expect to AA, and the #6 - #14 range at a lot of these weight is going to be extremely competitive.

3) 141 is WIDE open, and I love Dom Demas but I gotta think he's the favorite for first #1 to drop a match.  

4) David Carr is winning 157, right?

I don't know if he's going to win 157, but I'd be shocked if he didn't make a good run at it. He is going to rise up in the rankings quickly for sure. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

7 hours ago, jon said:

"""Unprecedented access""" lol.

Remember when... when rankings were free to read? Do you think this 'paywallcreep' a good thing?

Remember when...when radio and TV was free?  It’s almost 2020 my man. But you’re welcome to stay in the dark. 

Edited by AnklePicker

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, AnklePicker said:

 

 

Remember when...when radio and TV was free?  It’s almost 2020 my man. But you’re welcome to stay in the dark. 

You realize--right?--that I'm neither the first- nor the only person in this thread to give critique about the move to put rankings behind paywall. Why not talk about Flo's paywallcreep (which looks even worse alongside yearlong lock-in) not """when radio and TV was free"""? You condone expansion of Flo paywall but yet last week you express interest in using VPN. If Flo were Cornell you'd be the second coming of klehner!

 

Edited by jon

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here is a little taste for you WITHOUT copy and paste or anything of the like:

PSU 1 and Iowa 2.  Here is the side by side:
 
--------Iowa-------PSU
125    #1-----------NR
133    #5-----------#6
141    #9-----------#2
149    #6-----------NR
157    #2-----------#5
165    #2-----------#1
174    #4-----------#1
184    #10---------#6
197    #8-----------#3
285    #11----------#1

 

Share this post


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

You realize--right?--that I'm neither the first- nor the only person in this thread to give critique about the move to put rankings behind paywall. Why not talk about Flo's paywallcreep (which looks even worse alongside yearlong lock-in) not """when radio and TV was free"""? You condone expansion of Flo paywall but yet last week you express interest in using VPN. If Flo were Cornell you'd be the second coming of klehner!

 

Their annual subscription product is actually inexpensive. I guess it's all a matter of perspective. 

Btw, my rankings are free. I give the one that really matters out for free every year right here on this board. People complain about my totally free ranking too. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, jon said:

You realize--right?--that I'm neither the first- nor the only person in this thread to give critique about the move to put rankings behind paywall. Why not talk about Flo's paywallcreep (which looks even worse alongside yearlong lock-in) not """when radio and TV was free"""? You condone expansion of Flo paywall but yet last week you express interest in using VPN. If Flo were Cornell you'd be the second coming of klehner!

 

You come off as someone with limited critical reasoning skills (and I say this as someone who find's many of Flo's tactics to be dodgy).  Also, did a big red bear poop on your lawn or something, what's with the Cornell bashing?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, TBar1977 said:

Their annual subscription product is actually inexpensive. I guess it's all a matter of perspective

$12.50 monthly and $150 yearly are not the same pricing. Yes, TBar1977, diehard fans won't mind either pricepoint. Less-than-diehard fans, however, might like just a reasonably priced month-to-month option.

$12.50 a month is inexpensive. $150 a year is a barrier, a shortcoming, a target for critique.

Newspapers. Bread. TV programming. You can buy these things in small units!

I understand Flo pales in comparison to ESPN but the pricing difference between Flo and ESPN+ is stark. Same goes for Flo versus Track. Say what you want about Track but its pricing is flexible, fan friendly (i.e., choice between PPV and subscription) and that's awesome.

I think it's important to acknowledge nuances in topics mentioned here. Yearlong lock-in is one thing. Paywall a different thing... For whatever it's worth: I don't think rankings being behind paywall is so outrageous. But when the only way around the paywall is to subscribe for a year--a year!--then well that's alarming. Do you think paywallcreep a good thing?? So much for """unprecedented access"""!

And--yes--all those posts here that say 'Just go elsewhere for rankings' are totally spot-on.

Edited by jon

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This thread ought not center on me. And it ought not center on you. Unlike yours, Tbar, my take on Flo reflects not just my own interests.

There's a big difference between $12.50 pay-as-you-go and $150 lump sum. One's a barrier, man.

If coverage so great and if access so """unprecedented""" then why yearlong lock-in? Especially now that Flo paywall looks to be creepin' bigger and bigger, it makes sense for fans of wrestling to talk about Flo pricing!

Edited by jon

Share this post


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

This thread ought not center on me. And it ought not center on you. Unlike yours, Tbar, my take on Flo reflects not just my own interests.

There's a big difference between $12.50 pay-as-you-go and $150 lump sum. One's a barrier, man.

If coverage so great and if access so """unprecedented""" then why yearlong lock-in? Especially now that Flo paywall looks to be creepin' bigger and bigger, it makes sense for fans of wrestling to talk about Flo pricing!

Ok, go to intermat and move on. 

Share this post


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

Ok, go to intermat and move on. 

Wonderful contribution. Does that suggestion apply to me only or also to others who've expressed displeasure here? Rah rah rah coverage access...

My comments about Flo serve to foster discussion. Yours don't.

Why not add to the discussion -- do you think this paywallcreep a good thing?

Edited by jon

Share this post


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

Wonderful contribution. Does that suggestion apply to me only or also to others who've expressed displeasure here? Rah rah rah coverage access...

My comments about Flo serve to foster discussion. Yours don't.

I think 99% would agree they have had enough of your schtick about Flo. Yes you do stir up conversation but its ussually focused on trying to talk some sense into you and not about wrestling. My comment was an attempt to end a discussion nobody wants anymore.

 

As far as the rankings? Anyone surprised to see Tanner Sloan that high? I know he smoked Warner at Midlands, but Warner seemed to improve dramatically as the year went on and AA'd. Obviously, Sloan redshirted, but I think that overvalues the Midlands too much. Also he got majored by Brucki in the finals. He seemed to take advantage of Warners weakness on bottom, but got exposed by someone a little more experienced. If I look at the entire season, I dont know that I would rank him that high coming in.

Edited by russelscout

Share this post


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

I think 99% would agree they have had enough of your schtick about Flo.

You have a schtick about Flo just like I do. Only a different take, of course. I didn't start the talk here about paywall. I'm not the only person who's talking about paywall.

Flo paywall creeps bigger and bigger and yet you expect nobody to talk about it?

I bet you wouldn't mind if it were praise not displeasure. Rah rah rah coverage access.

Ignore list would work well to shield you from Flo schticks. You'll have to keep the list updated though -- i.e., plenty of persons express displeasure.

Buzz off, man. Just use your ignore list.

Edited by jon

Share this post


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

This thread ought not center on me. And it ought not center on you. Unlike yours, Tbar, my take on Flo reflects not just my own interests.

There's a big difference between $12.50 pay-as-you-go and $150 lump sum. One's a barrier, man.

If coverage so great and if access so """unprecedented""" then why yearlong lock-in? Especially now that Flo paywall looks to be creepin' bigger and bigger, it makes sense for fans of wrestling to talk about Flo pricing!

When Flo discontinued their monthly subscription model it told me that had they continued with it that it would only be at higher prices. So if they still offered a monthly pay product it might be at $15, $20, or even $25.

Jon, your stand on this issue lacks any basic understanding of how business works OR it is simply misguided. If you don't want to or can't afford to pay $150 per year, that does not make Flo's policy a poor one. Frankly, I was surprised they were as patient as they were with their old model. 

Share this post


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

You have a schtick about Flo just like I do. Only a different take, of course. I didn't start the talk here about paywall. I'm not the only person who's talking about paywall.

Flo paywall creeps bigger and bigger and yet you expect nobody to talk about it?

I bet you wouldn't mind if it were praise not displeasure. Rah rah rah coverage access.

I'm not the one who's moved to broaden the paywall. Paywallcreep not a good thing. Buzz off, man.

Yes someone made one comment and you jumped on the opportunity to make 18 more comments. 

I did weigh in already though. Go to the intermat and move on. There are other options for free. Someone else made this point also. View it like this: flo is premium content. You pay more for premium content. If there was no demand this wouldnt be an effective structure for them but it clearly is. If you dont want to pay, dont get butt hurt and complain online. Go take advantage of the free stuff that is out there. 

I have been critical of flo and willie plenty, but arguing with the economics of it is silly. You either see the value and pay for it or dont see the value and dont pay for it. Quit whining that you have to pay for things in this world. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, jon said:

You have a schtick about Flo just like I do. Only a different take, of course. I didn't start the talk here about paywall. I'm not the only person who's talking about paywall.

Flo paywall creeps bigger and bigger and yet you expect nobody to talk about it?

I bet you wouldn't mind if it were praise not displeasure. Rah rah rah coverage access.

I'm not the one who's moved to broaden the paywall. Paywallcreep not a good thing. Buzz off, man.

You are like the guy who drives a beat up 1970's era AMC Gremlin and complains that Mercedes charges 70k for one of their new models. 

What's it to you? You aren't doing business with the company that offends you anyway? 

All this over $150??? That is literally pocket change, man.

Share this post


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

I have been critical of flo and willie plenty, but arguing with the economics of it is silly. You either see the value and pay for it or dont see the value and dont pay for it. Quit whining that you have to pay for things in this world. 

No whining in general. No whining about having to pay for things. When Flo paywall creeps bigger and bigger, it makes sense for wrestling fans to talk about Flo pricing. The phrase 'Flo pricing' refers to pricing scheme (i.e., yearly subscription) not to dollar amount.

I myself can afford $150 a year. My take on Flo does not reflect my own circumstances.

Your assertion "whining that you have to pay for things in this world" is false, baseless, disingenuous. If you're gonna say nonsense when you see my posts then just put me on ignore.

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...