Hodge

[DSims 1]

Kyle Dake will win because he is a 4x champ and beat Taylor. That is my prediction. Now, who would I vote for? It would also be Dake and I'll give you the reasons why.

 

When I think of the Hodge, I just think of who is the best wrestler in the nation. You don't need a list of 7 criteria. So based on the eye test 5 guys meet the criteria of who I would love to have on my team with a match on the line and the guys with the wow factor. It's kind of like the old Supreme Court quote that I will paraphrase, "I can't define obscenity but I know it when I see it." I can't define who is deserving to win the Hodge but I know it when I see it. The list for me is narrowed down to 5 guys throughout the year. Stieber, Oliver, Dake, Ruth and Taylor. Stieber, Ruth and Taylor just absolutely dominate guys. Truly unbelieavable, they try to score as much and as often as possible. Oliver and Dake are a little different, they win, they don't care how. They just win. Oliver frustrates me in that he could win big everytime, but for whatever reason doesn't. The example is the finals in when he finally decided he needed the points in the last 30 seconds he got the points. I think he could have done that last year against Stieber, the difference was that Stieber is better than Chamberlain.

 

Ok. so why Dake. Now this is based somewhat on last year, but I truly believe Oliver is better than Stieber, so I am eliminating him. Oliver I am eliminating because he frustrates me so much watching him. Taylor obviously is elimated because he lost to Dake. It comes down to Ruth and Dake for me. Ruth that I know of had a match truly in doubt. Other than against Taylor, none of Dake's matches were ever truly in doubt. Yes, there were some close matches, but who here thought Caldwell was actually going to score on Dake and beat him?

 

There is another topic comparing Dake to Sanderson, and someone said it depends on which style you like. And there is some truth to that. But for me it boils down to Dake's matches against Taylor ( who wrestles very similarly to Ruth). Taylor most of the times seems better than Dake, he pins really good wrestlers really quickly, he majored Caldwell whereas Dake didn't but when they actually wrestled 3 times, Dake won them all. Dake can score offensively, he has unbelievable defense, and he can rideout when he needs it. He was/is the best. wrestler in the nation and deserves the Hodge.

[wrestler4lyfe 0]

Hodge = Most Dominant

 

Hands Down to Ed Ruth

 

If there was a Highest Achievement.. Dake

[denny 215]

Dake !

 

ESPN saw to that.

 

Ohhh, settle down.....I'm just doing some whack-a- doodling :P

[brianj 4]

Hodge = Most Dominant

 

Hands Down to Ed Ruth

 

If there was a Highest Achievement.. Dake

 

Taylor was in the running for most dominant too, until he met Dake.

[PANewbie 35]

When did I say 38 isn't greater than 31? Sure it is. But you cant take that fact and turn it into 38-0 with an NCAA title is "more undefeated" than 31-0 with an NCAA title - that is just ridiculous.

 

Opinions are opinions...but this is common sense - and is about as easy a concept to understand as 38 > 31 is for a 3rd grader. In terms of "Record" as a criteria for an award...if there is a 0 at the back end, and you didn't do something ridiculous like wrestle two matches and stop at 2-0, undefeated Nation Champion = undefeated Nation Champion, period.

 

Since you do think that someone can be "more undefeated" than someone else...im just going to bow out of this conversations now after this thought.

 

Having less opportunities for victory can skew stats like Most Dominant and Pin % in the undefeated wrestler with less victories...and conversely, the undefeated wrestler with more wins can logically be more undefeated because there were more opportunities to be lose.

 

That said, its Dake, Dake, Dake. Really, he's an awesome talent.

 

You bowed out because, in fact, you don't know the Hodge criteria better than anyone else. That is proven by the recent post in this thread about the changes in the way the Hodge is decided. Like most bullies, you huffed and puffed and bsteins went away. I hate when some who feel they are among elite wrestling cognoscenti come here and pontificate and bully.

[PA-Fan 0]

You bowed out because, in fact, you don't know the Hodge criteria better than anyone else.

 

That is proven by the recent post in this thread about the changes in the way the Hodge is decided.

 

Like most bullies, you huffed and puffed and bsteins went away. I hate when some who feel they are among elite wrestling cognoscenti come here and pontificate and bully.

 

No, no, no. Here you go again telling me why im doing something, or what my argument would be, or what I think - and then responding to yourself stating what you think I would or did say. Give it a rest already - it's called building a straw man.

 

The way the Hodge is decided was not changed (as in what needs to be done to earn the award)- the committee who decides it was changed...that is not the same thing. Think of it like this: how does not equal who (although they have the same letters).

 

Bully huh? Interesting. Im a bully because I don't agree with someone -and state why I dont agree- stating that Ruth wins criteria over Stieber when he clearly does not. And when You continually attempt to tell me that Ruth was "more undefeated" than Stieber. Gotcha - crystal clear. Discussing on a discussion board = Bully.

 

Im not even going to address any of the other points you made because it's become a moot point (see this is why I actually bowed out of that mind-numbing discussion with you) - you just continue to state things over and over in different ways after I counter them instead of moving on with the discussion (how many different ways can you say that undefeated National Champion does not equal undefeated National Champion?)

[PA-Fan 0]

Hodge = Most Dominant

 

Wrong. The Hodge is not the "Most Dominant" Award. From the WIN website : "The Dan Hodge Trophy, considered the Heisman Trophy for amateur wrestling, has been presented to the nation’s best wrestler since 1995."

 

The Hodge is for the Nation's best wrestler - with an emphasis on # of pins since Hodge himself was a great pinner.

 

In fact, the NCAA recently came up with a Most Dominant Award - seems unnecessary considering the Hodge is for most dominant, no?

[PANewbie 35]

You bowed out because, in fact, you don't know the Hodge criteria better than anyone else.

 

That is proven by the recent post in this thread about the changes in the way the Hodge is decided.

 

Like most bullies, you huffed and puffed and bsteins went away. I hate when some who feel they are among elite wrestling cognoscenti come here and pontificate and bully.

 

No, no, no. Here you go again telling me why im doing something, or what my argument would be, or what I think - and then responding to yourself stating what you think I would or did say. Give it a rest already - it's called building a straw man.

 

The way the Hodge is decided was not changed (as in what needs to be done to earn the award)- the committee who decides it was changed...that is not the same thing. Think of it like this: how does not equal who (although they have the same letters).

 

Bully huh? Interesting. Im a bully because I don't agree with someone -and state why I dont agree- stating that Ruth wins criteria over Stieber when he clearly does not. And when You continually attempt to tell me that Ruth was "more undefeated" than Stieber. Gotcha - crystal clear. Discussing on a discussion board = Bully.

 

Im not even going to address any of the other points you made because it's become a moot point (see this is why I actually bowed out of that mind-numbing discussion with you) - you just continue to state things over and over in different ways after I counter them instead of moving on with the discussion (how many different ways can you say that undefeated National Champion does not equal undefeated National Champion?)

 

I thought you bowed out? You didn't bully me. But you are doing the same thing you accuse me of. You say the "The way the Hodge is decided was not changed" and in the next sentence contradict yourself by saying those who decide it change. You don't get to decide what change counts and what doesn't. Change happens. Deal with it. And I continue to be amazed at your continued attempts to counter the principles of mathematics.

[PA-Fan 0]

The way the Hodge is decided was not changed (as in what needs to be done to earn the award)- the committee who decides it was changed...that is not the same thing. Think of it like this: how does not equal who (although they have the same letters).

 

That is what I said. I said The way the Hodge is decided was not changed (as in what needs to be done to earn the award).

 

Now, in your representation of what I said that you just made you are either being 1) intentionally dishonest and purposely/knowingly misrepresenting what I actually said in order to point out a contradiction that does not actually exist...or 2) you honestly don't have great reading comprehension skills.

 

Either way - job well done.

 

And "counter the principles of mathematics"? :roll: This is the discussion I bowed out of - I stated why I did so in my previous post - and you just demonstrated to me again why I did.

[Oldskool142 0]

Hodge = Dake then ,Ruth ,Wright ,Steiber in that order .

[SUMO 0]

I just hate the past credentials criteria, and would never vote based on that unless it was for, say, most outstanding senior. I just don't think what is effectively a wrestler of the year award should be a lifetime achievement award.

You might "hate" it but shouldn't be ignored; afterall, it is part of the criteria. It might not win him or anyone else the award but an undefeated season, pin leader, and defeating a past year NC and Hodge recipient WILL. And, winning your 4th title and making history in 4 diff weight classes is the cherry on top or confirmation or the deciding factor if all else is equal... which is not even the case this year. Steiber edges Dake in only 1 part of the criteria whereas Dake edges him in 4. No reason to get cute with the voting. You just witnessed something you'll probably never see again in your lifetime.

[PANewbie 35]

The way the Hodge is decided was not changed (as in what needs to be done to earn the award)- the committee who decides it was changed...that is not the same thing. Think of it like this: how does not equal who (although they have the same letters).

 

That is what I said. I said The way the Hodge is decided was not changed (as in what needs to be done to earn the award).

 

Now, in your representation of what I said that you just made you are either being 1) intentionally dishonest and purposely/knowingly misrepresenting what I actually said in order to point out a contradiction that does not actually exist...or 2) you honestly don't have great reading comprehension skills.

 

Either way - job well done.

 

And "counter the principles of mathematics"? :roll: This is the discussion I bowed out of - I stated why I did so in my previous post - and you just demonstrated to me again why I did.

 

Score one for the principles of mathematics... :lol:

[PA-Fan 0]

The way the Hodge is decided was not changed (as in what needs to be done to earn the award)- the committee who decides it was changed...that is not the same thing. Think of it like this: how does not equal who (although they have the same letters).

 

That is what I said. I said The way the Hodge is decided was not changed (as in what needs to be done to earn the award).

 

Now, in your representation of what I said that you just made you are either being 1) intentionally dishonest and purposely/knowingly misrepresenting what I actually said in order to point out a contradiction that does not actually exist...or 2) you honestly don't have great reading comprehension skills.

 

Either way - job well done.

 

And "counter the principles of mathematics"? :roll: This is the discussion I bowed out of - I stated why I did so in my previous post - and you just demonstrated to me again why I did.

 

Score one for the principles of mathematics... :lol:

 

I think you are over-using this phrase "principles of mathematics". Now, I am not mathematician - but I think it would be fair to say that 0 = 0, and call it a "principle" - correct? And since you love to harp on your principle that "38 > 32" (or whatever their respective win totals were) ... ill just take the same approach as you and use it as proof for my claim. So there ya go - principles of mathematics it is.

 

Undefeated is undefeated is undefeated - the fact that Ruth received more votes than Stieber for the Hodge does not validate your opinion that he was "more undefeated" than Stieber.

 

Once again, job well done.

[wrestling fan 0]

Well deserved!!

[rossel3 77]

Well deserved!!

----

 

I'll second that. What a field too... Ruth, Steiber, Oliver

 

Interesting that Ruth was the winner among the fans voting, but the Hodge committee went with Dake.

[Medicine_Man 875]

Well deserved!!

----

 

I'll second that. What a field too... Ruth, Steiber, Oliver

 

Interesting that Ruth was the winner among the fans voting, but the Hodge committee went with Dake.

Fan voting only counted 4.76190476190476%

[scribe 1,655]

I think you can vote more than once. Musta been a vote-for-Ruth campaign on that there psu rivals forum.

[GuillermoBilletas 149]

I think you can vote more than once. Musta been a vote-for-Ruth campaign on that there psu rivals forum.

 

the center of the wrestling universe

[redblades 322]

Interesting that Ruth was the winner among the fans voting, but the Hodge committee went with Dake.

 

So the committee was unanimous? Interesting...

 

This will give us plenty to discuss until next November ;) , but in the meantime - congratulations to Kyle Dake, it's been one heck of a year, one heck of a career!

[straggler 65]

Congratulations to Dake. I was just reading an intermat profile of Dake when he was an incoming freshman at Cornell. Loved watching him wrestle. He had a great high school career (junior world team, etc), but he didn't start wrestling year round until 10th grade. He took loses here and there but kept improving. Maybe this doesn't make any sense, but I always thought that the fact that he wasn't a four time state champion, that he was a relative late bloomer in the sense that he really seemed to come into his own after his junior high school season (he lost to Paddock as a junior in the state finals), helped contribute to his college accomplishments. He just had terrific mental toughness.

Well deserved.

[WRfan1 142]

Hodge = Most Dominant

 

Hands Down to Ed Ruth

 

If there was a Highest Achievement.. Dake

 

I think the competition has to be taken into account when looking at dominance. Dake, Ruth, Oliver, Steiber, Maple.

[rstrong 75]

You guys are an interesting bunch. I'm not Cornell fan or Dake fan. Neither PSU or OSU either.

 

The Hodge run was obvious all week - Dake wins, then Ruth & Stieber (either one 2nd or 3rd - doesn't matter), then the other undefeateds.

 

If you think something else you need to remove your homer spectacles. Or maybe you just like to bicker or get the last word in... which is perfectly fine. It even grows the sport, according to some people. So then, by all means, continue.

[mattmanx 0]

Big fan of Dake, his total body of work has to put him in the top 3 or 4 greatest of all time. But I believe the level of competition at 65 vs 84 this year should have had the Hodge go to Ruth. Goodness even Yohn AA at 65.

[BigRedMachine 210]

Big fan of Dake, his total body of work has to put him in the top 3 or 4 greatest of all time. But I believe the level of competition at 65 vs 84 this year should have had the Hodge go to Ruth. Goodness even Yohn AA at 65.

Ok... even Lofthouse AA'ed at 184.

 

you really think Bosak and Hamlin are a tougher duo than Taylor and Caldwell?

[rstrong 75]

Big fan of Dake, his total body of work has to put him in the top 3 or 4 greatest of all time. But I believe the level of competition at 65 vs 84 this year should have had the Hodge go to Ruth. Goodness even Yohn AA at 65.

 

Yohn is absolutely a legitimate AA and has wins over many AA's over his career. I understand threads here get a little out of control, bet let's get back to basic sportsmanship. No need to disrespect an AA wrestler after his impressive accomplishment - it's bad form.