Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Jimmy Cinnabon

Sammy Sasso wins Freshman of the Year

Recommended Posts

8 minutes ago, ionel said:

I assume this was a b10 award, otherwise it makes just about zero sense.

Even Big 10 makes no sense.  Why would a 3 loss winner who didn’t win the conference win it over a 1 loss (with redemption) same conference champion.

Share this post


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

Even Big 10 makes no sense.  Why would a 3 loss winner who didn’t win the conference win it over a 1 loss (with redemption) same conference champion.

It has a ton also to do with who you beat. 

Sasso had wins over the #1,7,8,9 and 10 seeds also having beaten 2 of the 3 guys he lost 2. He also, admittedly gained the benefit of basically ignoring the “fluky” loss by fall. 

Brooks had wins over # 6,7 and 11 while only wrestling 16 matches. Sasso wrestled 27.

I find it a bit funny that you argue 18 matches for Lee not being enough while endorsing a guy with less matches in this case......

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, MSU158 said:

It has a ton also to do with who you beat. 

Sasso had wins over the #1,7,8,9 and 10 seeds also having beaten 2 of the 3 guys he lost 2. He also, admittedly gained the benefit of basically ignoring the “fluky” loss by fall. 

Brooks had wins over # 6,7 and 11 while only wrestling 16 matches. Sasso wrestled 27.

I find it a bit funny that you argue 18 matches for Lee not being enough while endorsing a guy with less matches in this case......

I mean...you make some good points here 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, MSU158 said:

It has a ton also to do with who you beat. 

Sasso had wins over the #1,7,8,9 and 10 seeds also having beaten 2 of the 3 guys he lost 2. He also, admittedly gained the benefit of basically ignoring the “fluky” loss by fall. 

Brooks had wins over # 6,7 and 11 while only wrestling 16 matches. Sasso wrestled 27.

I find it a bit funny that you argue 18 matches for Lee not being enough while endorsing a guy with less matches in this case......

Difference is in one case both guys are undefeated.  

In this particular instance, one has 3 losses (1 by fall in the first period to a non all American threat), and Aaron Brooks has 1 loss (which he avenged) and won Big Tens.

Sasso went the other way, winning against Lugo then losing when it counted more at Big Tens.

Typically guys who win championships are the ones who win awards.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, MSU158 said:

It has a ton also to do with who you beat. 

Sasso had wins over the #1,7,8,9 and 10 seeds also having beaten 2 of the 3 guys he lost 2. He also, admittedly gained the benefit of basically ignoring the “fluky” loss by fall. 

Brooks had wins over # 6,7 and 11 while only wrestling 16 matches. Sasso wrestled 27.

I find it a bit funny that you argue 18 matches for Lee not being enough while endorsing a guy with less matches in this case......

But with losses and what most thought a weak weight or at least no clear cut top guy or two.  In fact who is #1?  Course we could argue the b10 guys at 165 had a weak schedule cause none had to wrestle Griffith.  ;)

But yeah explain how a Fr in the Hodge conversation is below a guy with 3 losses for Fr of the year unless of course its b10 Fr of yr. 

Edited by ionel

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Different subject, I also find it interesting that the OP gives congrats to an Oh State guy when shieldofP is adamant that JC is a PSU guy & P the Ohio guy.  Perhaps some personality drift or forgot who's turn it was at the keyboard.  ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, 1032004 said:

Should’ve been Griffith

I don't see it.  He had a great record and all, but he really didn't beat ANYBODY but Shields and maybe Wittlake.  I mean, Wittlake wrestled an even softer schedule than Griffith.  His 2 losses were to Griffith and Marinelli and then his best win was either Fogarty or Bullard.  

I think Sasso deserves it based on a considerably tougher schedule, while beating the #1 wrestler.  In addition, I know many thought of 149 as a pretty weak weight, myself included.  But, I have come around.  I think Lugo was vastly improved and O'Connor is no joke.  Kolodzik is still a stud.  Boo, Degen and Mauller are AA's.  Sasso and Lee have proven to be top notch freshmen.  149 turned out to be a lot tougher than I thought it would be!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, MSU158 said:

I don't see it.  He had a great record and all, but he really didn't beat ANYBODY but Shields and maybe Wittlake.  I mean, Wittlake wrestled an even softer schedule than Griffith.  His 2 losses were to Griffith and Marinelli and then his best win was either Fogarty or Bullard.  

I think Sasso deserves it based on a considerably tougher schedule, while beating the #1 wrestler.  In addition, I know many thought of 149 as a pretty weak weight, myself included.  But, I have come around.  I think Lugo was vastly improved and O'Connor is no joke.  Kolodzik is still a stud.  Boo, Degen and Mauller are AA's.  Sasso and Lee have proven to be top notch freshmen.  149 turned out to be a lot tougher than I thought it would be!

Is it tougher, or just has a lot of guys that are close, which makes the weight class fun and exciting?  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, Mokoma said:

Is it tougher, or just has a lot of guys that are close, which makes the weight class fun and exciting?  

6 returning AA's and 2 very talented freshmen.  Kanen Storr ranked 10th.  Yes, I think it is definitely tougher than it looked like it was going to be at the beginning of the season.  Now, I am not saying it is near as top heavy as 133, but it is about as deep as any weight.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, MSU158 said:

I don't see it.  He had a great record and all, but he really didn't beat ANYBODY but Shields and maybe Wittlake.  I mean, Wittlake wrestled an even softer schedule than Griffith.  His 2 losses were to Griffith and Marinelli and then his best win was either Fogarty or Bullard.  

I think Sasso deserves it based on a considerably tougher schedule, while beating the #1 wrestler.  In addition, I know many thought of 149 as a pretty weak weight, myself included.  But, I have come around.  I think Lugo was vastly improved and O'Connor is no joke.  Kolodzik is still a stud.  Boo, Degen and Mauller are AA's.  Sasso and Lee have proven to be top notch freshmen.  149 turned out to be a lot tougher than I thought it would be!

3 losses and didn't even win his conference doesn't really seem like it should win, IMO.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, MSU158 said:

6 returning AA's and 2 very talented freshmen.  Kanen Storr ranked 10th.  Yes, I think it is definitely tougher than it looked like it was going to be at the beginning of the season.  Now, I am not saying it is near as top heavy as 133, but it is about as deep as any weight.

Is 6 that many?  I didn’t check all the weights but just looked at 141 for another comparison and I counted 8 there (just glanced through it I may have missed someone).

Edited by Mokoma
Fixed typo couldn’t to counted.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, 1032004 said:

3 losses and didn't even win his conference doesn't really seem like it should win, IMO.

He took 2nd to the #1 guy(whom he also beat) in the country in a rather controversial fashion. His other loss was to a very talented freshman whom he would later beat and place above at conferences.  I don't think he should be penalized for wrestling, BY FAR, the toughest schedule of the top freshmen.

His loss by fall is the one thing that can be used to hurt his argument.  However, it was definitely a bit fluky and very early in the season.  

Simply put, the other top freshmen wrestled powderpuff schedules in comparison.  Having less losses doesn't mean much to me when you barely wrestled any top 10 guys, nor do they have  the amount of wins over top 10 guys, let alone the #1.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, MSU158 said:

He took 2nd to the #1 guy(whom he also beat) in the country in a rather controversial fashion. His other loss was to a very talented freshman whom he would later beat and place above at conferences.  I don't think he should be penalized for wrestling, BY FAR, the toughest schedule of the top freshmen.

His loss by fall is the one thing that can be used to hurt his argument.  However, it was definitely a bit fluky and very early in the season.  

Simply put, the other top freshmen wrestled powderpuff schedules in comparison.  Having less losses doesn't mean much to me when you barely wrestled any top 10 guys, nor do they have  the amount of wins over top 10 guys, let alone the #1.

 

How many top 10-20 wins did Sasso really have?  According to Intermat:
 

#1 Lugo (who he also lost to)

#7 Lee (who he also lost to)

#10 Storr

#12 Purinton

#17 Verk

#20 Richard


that's it.

 

Griffith beat

#4 Wittlake

#7 Shields

#8 Skidgel

#11 Fogarty

#15 Monday

#16 Smith (by fall)

 

I'll take the guy that didn't lose 3 times.

Share this post


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

Is 6 that many?  I didn’t check all the weights but just looked at 141 for another comparison and I couldn’t 8 there (just glanced through it I may have missed someone).

125: (4)  Lee, Mueller, Picc, Glory.

133: (5)  Gross, Rivera, DeSanto, RBY, Bridges.

141: (8)  Pletcher, Lee, Demas, Red, McKee, Wilson, Perry, Leeth

149: (6) Lugo, O'Connor, Kolodzik, Degen, Mauller, Boo

157: (4)  Deakin, Hidlay, Young, Early

165: (6) Marinelli, Joseph, Wick, White, Shields, McFadden

174: (7) Hall, Kemerer, Kutler, Skatzka, Labriola, Steiert, Smith

184: (1) Venz

197: (6) Moore, Darmstadt, Warner, Brucki, Rasheed, Geer

285: (6) Steveson, Wood, Stencel, Hillger, Hall, Hokit

tied for 3rd.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Mokoma said:

Difference is in one case both guys are undefeated.  

In this particular instance, one has 3 losses (1 by fall in the first period to a non all American threat), and Aaron Brooks has 1 loss (which he avenged) and won Big Tens.

Sasso went the other way, winning against Lugo then losing when it counted more at Big Tens.

Typically guys who win championships are the ones who win awards.

You argue about taking 2 from Stieber but then want to ignore Sasso's backpoints that weren't called vs lugo? At the least lugo should have gotten warned and then he would have been forced to change position 

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...