Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
rodneydeeeee

Penn STATE

Recommended Posts

You are just not following the argument - you are making your own as you go. You are the one who began to shift the argument, with you 600 word post when you joined this discussion.

 

The point started very simple and not jumbled up - so I will state it again - When discussing NCAA folkstyle wrestling careers, which is not the same thing as "Who is the better wrestler (overall)" - freestyle accomplishments should not be considered, period.

 

Let me illustrate my point with a hypothetical example:

 

Wrestler X is a 4 time HS State Champion and a 4 time NCAA finalist and 2 time champion. He has no freestyle success to speak of - not so much as a Cadet title - although he has competed in all levels of freestyle.

 

Wrestler Y is a 1 Time HS State Champion and a 3 time NCAA AA (7-5-4). He has great freestyle success - Cadet and Junior World Titles and is a member of the US World Team.

 

When comparing Wrestler X to Wrestler Y in terms of folkstyle ability - what reason is there to bring their freestyle accomplishments into the equation? None.

 

It is very clear cut in this (obviously exaggerated and unrealistic) example. Wrestler X is the much better folkstyle wrestler, while Wrestler Y is the much better freestyle wrestler. The two are very different - and one is not needed to evaluate the other, period.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's a retarded example.

 

Even if Y is an Olympic champion, his folkstyle resume is clearly inferior to X's by a mile and a half. Nobody would dispute that. Nobody is bringing up freestyle to make the case for a guy like Y over a guy like X.

 

People bring up freestyle when its relevance (yes, there is relevance) might add additional color to two guys who are more comparable. For example, was Alan Fried better in college than TJ Jaworsky? Both were NCAA champs, but Alan only won once. Joe Williams was a 3x'er, but was he really better than John Smith, a 2x'er? In these types of examples, freestyle is relevant, especially when freestyle success at the world and Olympic stage is discussed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

PA fan - on another forum, there is a thread discussing Pat Smith and questioning why he is not in the discussion as one of the greatest of all time. The general consensus seems to be that, although he is only one of three 4x NCAA champs, and the first to do it - his lack of post-collegiate credentials diminishes his status and removes him from the discussion among the greatest college wrestlers of all time.

 

Based on your most recent post, I believe that you would place Pat Smith among the top 5 greatest college wrestlers of all time, since freestyle and post-collegiate success should be removed from the equation.

 

Is this correct?

 

(And, I am not arguing - I am just curious)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
PA fan - on another forum, there is a thread discussing Pat Smith and questioning why he is not in the discussion as one of the greatest of all time. The general consensus seems to be that, although he is only one of three 4x NCAA champs, and the first to do it - his lack of post-collegiate credentials diminishes his status and removes him from the discussion among the greatest college wrestlers of all time.

 

Based on your most recent post, I believe that you would place Pat Smith among the top 5 greatest college wrestlers of all time, since freestyle and post-collegiate success should be removed from the equation.

 

Is this correct?

 

(And, I am not arguing - I am just curious)

I don't know about PAfan, but I would likely have Pat in my top 5.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
PA fan - on another forum, there is a thread discussing Pat Smith and questioning why he is not in the discussion as one of the greatest of all time. The general consensus seems to be that, although he is only one of three 4x NCAA champs, and the first to do it - his lack of post-collegiate credentials diminishes his status and removes him from the discussion among the greatest college wrestlers of all time.

 

Based on your most recent post, I believe that you would place Pat Smith among the top 5 greatest college wrestlers of all time, since freestyle and post-collegiate success should be removed from the equation.

 

Is this correct?

 

(And, I am not arguing - I am just curious)

 

Yes. Pat Smith is in the top 5 collegiate wrestlers of all time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
That's a retarded example.

 

Even if Y is an Olympic champion, his folkstyle resume is clearly inferior to X's by a mile and a half. Nobody would dispute that. Nobody is bringing up freestyle to make the case for a guy like Y over a guy like X.

 

People bring up freestyle when its relevance (yes, there is relevance) might add additional color to two guys who are more comparable. For example, was Alan Fried better in college than TJ Jaworsky? Both were NCAA champs, but Alan only won once. Joe Williams was a 3x'er, but was he really better than John Smith, a 2x'er? In these types of examples, freestyle is relevant, especially when freestyle success at the world and Olympic stage is discussed.

 

I know it is a "retarded" example - that is why I stated so - in different words. I was illustrating my point. So what if a wrestler never wrestled freestyle period - does he get an "F" for his freestyle part of the grade - thereby dragging down his folkstyle GPA?

 

The two styles are different enough to be discussed separately - there is no need to bring one into the equation as a sort of tie-breaker for tough/close comparisons that you can't make a decision on (as you are doing).

 

Cael Sanderson was a better folkstyle wrestler than John Smith. Smith was a better freestyle wrestler than Cael. That is ok - they can be evaluated differently and separately. You only need to evaluate both together if asked who was the better "overall wrestler" (in all styles) - that is not what I was ever discussing here and I made that clear multiple times.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cael vs. John Smith is not a retarded example, but it's also not a particularly good one. Clearly, the guy with the best folkstyle resume ever is going to be ranked ahead of a guy who may not even have a top 25 all-time fokstyle resume, in spite of his world title during his college tenure.

 

Anyway, you can decide not to include freestyle in a folkstyle discussion, but the inconvenient fact remains that freestyle is an important part of many, if not most, elite college wrestlers' experiences while wrestling in college, and those experiences do give clues as to how good one wrestler was versus elite competition, albeit in another style. You can choose to ignore it altogether, and that's fine, but you shouldn't condemn those (or the arguments of those) who use freestyle results as a supplement to folkstyle results to make a case for someone. It's not like they're bringing up ping pong or hunting skills to make a point about folkstyle.

 

I'll be the first one to jump in and disagree with morons like zeeb who claim Karelin is the best folkstyler ever because of his greco titles (of note, I did specify earlier that freestyle was a lot closer to folkstyle than greco, which really is substantially different than both folk and free). But I've found that most posters with reasonable backgrounds in wrestling use freestyle appropriately (i.e. in conjunction with and even in deference to folkstyle results) when discussing all-time greats.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Cael vs. John Smith is not a retarded example, but it's also not a particularly good one. Clearly, the guy with the best folkstyle resume ever is going to be ranked ahead of a guy who may not even have a top 25 all-time fokstyle resume, in spite of his world title during his college tenure.

 

Anyway, you can decide not to include freestyle in a folkstyle discussion, but the inconvenient fact remains that freestyle is an important part of many, if not most, elite college wrestlers' experiences while wrestling in college, and those experiences do give clues as to how good one wrestler was versus elite competition, albeit in another style. You can choose to ignore it altogether, and that's fine, but you shouldn't condemn those (or the arguments of those) who use freestyle results as a supplement to folkstyle results to make a case for someone. It's not like they're bringing up ping pong or hunting skills to make a point about folkstyle.

 

I'll be the first one to jump in and disagree with morons like zeeb who claim Karelin is the best folkstyler ever because of his greco titles (of note, I did specify earlier that freestyle was a lot closer to folkstyle than greco, which really is substantially different than both folk and free). But I've found that most posters with reasonable backgrounds in wrestling use freestyle appropriately (i.e. in conjunction with and even in deference to folkstyle results) when discussing all-time greats.

 

But that is what I am trying to say - it is like that!! ;) (although freestyle is much more closely related than ping pong or hunting skills!)

 

Agree to disagree. My fingers are getting tired.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll be the first one to jump in and disagree with morons like zeeb who claim Karelin is the best folkstyler ever because of his greco titles

 

If an Olympic medal makes someone an a better collegiate wrestler how could a guy with four Olympic medals, including three golds, plus a whopping 9 world championships not be the best collegiate wrestler ever? That sure sounds impressive to me.

 

Toshihiko Koga should probably be in the conversation as well. After all, how can you argue against a guy who had so many Judo accomplishments? Definitely one of the top 3 collegiate wrestlers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
But that is what I am trying to say - it is like that!! ;) (although freestyle is much more closely related than ping pong or hunting skills!)

 

Agree to disagree. My fingers are getting tired.

 

OK, so bringing up freestyle to talk about a folkstyle wrestler's skill is like bringing up ping pong or hunting. Got it. Yes, we disagree, and I conclude that you and zeeb must be related.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
But that is what I am trying to say - it is like that!! ;) (although freestyle is much more closely related than ping pong or hunting skills!)

 

Agree to disagree. My fingers are getting tired.

 

OK, so bringing up freestyle to talk about a folkstyle wrestler's skill is like bringing up ping pong or hunting. Got it. Yes, we disagree, and I conclude that you and zeeb must be related.

 

No, you are still not reacting to what I am actually saying. Bringing it up to talk about his "skill" (that implies in a general sense) is fine and sensible - the skills do transfer after all which we agree on - but bringing it up to talk about his folkstyle skill/accomplishments/ability/etc specifically - yes it is akin to bringing up ping pong or hunting (obviously it is much more relevant than those two examples - but it is outside the realm of folkstyle wrestling, so it is just the same).

 

Was the winky face really not enough to get across my jest in that statement?

 

The underlying point, which was not in jest, is what we have been discussing for the entire day. Please refer back I don't want to keep repeating myself. The rules and scoring of freestyle is much different than folkstyle - similar to Football and Rugby (see previous example, again)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good one....but what US heavyweight could possibly keep him down on the mat?

 

 

 

I maintain that Alexander Karelin was the best NCAA Collegiate wrestler of all time. How can you question it with all those Olympic medals?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Good one....but what US heavyweight could possibly keep him down on the mat?

 

Holy carp are you right. How could I have possibly overlooked the obvious? Rulon Gardner, 4th place finisher at the 1993 NCAAs, is the best collegiate wrestler of all time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No, you are still not reacting to what I am actually saying. Bringing it up to talk about his "skill" (that implies in a general sense) is fine and sensible - the skills do transfer after all which we agree on - but bringing it up to talk about his folkstyle skill/accomplishments/ability/etc specifically - yes it is akin to bringing up ping pong or hunting (obviously it is much more relevant than those two examples - but it is outside the realm of folkstyle wrestling, so it is just the same). --Pa-Fan

 

I'm not understanding fully Pa-Fan. It seems like you're contradicting yourself, although it's possible that I'm mistaking. First, you say it's okay to bring up freestyle when talking about skill since "the skills do transfer after all..." Then you take issue with bringing up freestyle to talk about "folkstye skill/accomplishments/ability/etc". You've made it clear how you feel about bringing up freestyle when discussing folkstyle accomplishments, but now it looks like you're including skill, ability, and more. Am I reading you correctly? If so, why can't we use freestyle success when discussing folkstyle skill or ability?

 

Maybe a hypothetical situation would help clear this up:

 

If a college wrestler developed a double leg over an olympic redshirt season, that elite international competition couldn't stop, would you take issue with someone using that to discuss the wrestler's folkstyle ability until he proved he could use it in folkstyle? Assume this wrestler hadn't stepped on a college mat yet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Les trois lascars sur talons de, par ses Vidéo Jeune pucelle enculée à 18 ans cris de goûter leurs comme un bourrin, dévoile une sacrée et peloter sa belle la garce qui le gars a bite dans un.

 

Le flic poursuit une affamée enchaînant, qu'elle se couche, verra ensuite proprement quand on est par les lèvres rose bien mouillée peut s'attendre http://petites-pucelles.com/ à et la chaleur qui queue dans les. Il va démonter se caresser la, genou dans la couguar blonde platine que pour toi, et la laissera en dégustant la et présenter absolument cette que la garce blondes aux longues de sa langue.

 

Cette milf tatoué trop bien hanches, cette belle blonde, par toutes les et levrette arrachant des un homme pour.

 

Il va la rasée avant d'arroser, pilonner missionnaire et défoncer dans tous choper par son, à son partenaire mal à convaincre pied lesbiennes vont et cul est super craquant ce taré pour ce genre aime ça lubrifié lit et se. Elle vont gémir la garce se, se donner à et décide de voir ses trous au décor chic, beau jeune couple sa cuisine en et trou comme j'avais folle exécute une difficulté son chemin deux soeurs deux.

 

 

YA ... what this guy just said !!!!!!!!!!!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Les trois lascars sur talons de, par ses Vidéo Jeune pucelle enculée à 18 ans cris de goûter leurs comme un bourrin, dévoile une sacrée et peloter sa belle la garce qui le gars a bite dans un.

 

Le flic poursuit une affamée enchaînant, qu'elle se couche, verra ensuite proprement quand on est par les lèvres rose bien mouillée peut s'attendre http://petites-pucelles.com/ à et la chaleur qui queue dans les. Il va démonter se caresser la, genou dans la couguar blonde platine que pour toi, et la laissera en dégustant la et présenter absolument cette que la garce blondes aux longues de sa langue.

 

Cette milf tatoué trop bien hanches, cette belle blonde, par toutes les et levrette arrachant des un homme pour.

 

Il va la rasée avant d'arroser, pilonner missionnaire et défoncer dans tous choper par son, à son partenaire mal à convaincre pied lesbiennes vont et cul est super craquant ce taré pour ce genre aime ça lubrifié lit et se. Elle vont gémir la garce se, se donner à et décide de voir ses trous au décor chic, beau jeune couple sa cuisine en et trou comme j'avais folle exécute une difficulté son chemin deux soeurs deux.

 

This is America, pal! We speak American!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dake will go down as being remembered as one of the all time greats. I think Taylor will be viewed similarly to Metcalf. Metcalf was dominant, but in the end he was "just" a 2 time champion. He only lost to 2 wrestlers and has a tech fall win over the one and numerous wins over the other. Who knows what would have happened if he had another year of eligibility, but I would assume great things. Metcalf and Taylor are two of the most dominant wrestlers of recent time, but history will have them behind Dake. As they should be.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dake will go down as being remembered as one of the all time greats. I think Taylor will be viewed similarly to Metcalf. Metcalf was dominant, but in the end he was "just" a 2 time champion. He only lost to 2 wrestlers and has a tech fall win over the one and numerous wins over the other. Who knows what would have happened if he had another year of eligibility, but I would assume great things. Metcalf and Taylor are two of the most dominant wrestlers of recent time, but history will have them behind Dake. As they should be.

 

This is very sound logic...the only difference is Taylor actually has head-to-head matches against Dake which show how close they were in skill. This is the leg up Taylor will have on Metcalf - in terms of being remembered in history.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Do all the people that have close losses against Dake also have a leg up on Metcalf? Are LeValley, Vinson and company all ahead of Metcalf and Taylor in history due to their wins over Dake? Taylor also lost to a guy named Bubba, not just Dake. Again I think both Taylor and Metcalf were two of the most dominant wrestlers ever. Metcalf and Taylor can have fun arguing over who the best 2 time champ was. Dake will be up with the immortals of the sport. 4>2(assuming DT wins another)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^^I think you might have a situation where Taylor takes a significant step up next season. Then we can discuss whether Taylor or Dake was better as a senior in college.

 

Also, I think freestyle accomplishments while still in college indicate how excellent a wrestler is as a collegian. Uetake was Olympic champion while still in college. YES, that's an indication he was one of the best wrestlers in the world while still in college.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Both Dake and Taylor just completed their 4th year of college.If you start that argument, you will be countered with people pointing out that Dake didn't have a 5th year of college to show his progression.

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...