Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
MPC

Who has the Oldest starting lineup?

Recommended Posts

With Suriano headed to Michigan---that gives them another 24 year old to add to the lineup? With Micic graduating high school in 2014, does this make them one of the oldest in the country? Or are the Iowa super, super seniors still king?---Honestly I get the idea of not penalizing wrestlers for a cancelled season, but you have to feel bad for the 17-18 year old freshman competing against 7th year college guys in their mid-20s. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It might be nice to eventually get a postmortem on the extra year of eligibility from an academic perspective.

Are those who take advantage of the extra year pursuing and obtaining graduate degrees?  Or are they simply delaying adulthood without much to show for it?

Hopefully most athletes won’t fall into the latter category because it would be a tremendous waste of resources. 

Edited by Katie

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, Katie said:

It might be nice to eventually get a postmortem on the extra year of eligibility from an academic perspective.  Are those who take advantage of the extra year pursuing and obtaining graduate degrees?  Or are they simply delaying adulthood without much to show for it?  

"Delaying adulthood." What a bunch of crack pot. They're doing what they love to do. How many "adults"  can honestly say that about their jobs? Besides, it's not like many of them were destined for an office job even if the extra year wasn't on the table. I will bet a sandwich that the vast majority of the seniors taking the Covid relief year will stick around in wrestling long after this season 

Edited by Mr. Poopy butthole
Spelling errors because fat thumbs and small screen

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, Mr. Poopy butthole said:

"Delaying adulthood." What a bunch of crack pot. They're doing what they love to do. How many "adults"  can honestly say that about their jobs? Besides, it's not like many of them were destined for an office job even if the extra year wasn't on the table. I will bet a sandwich that the vast majority of the seniors taking the Covid relief year will stick around in wrestling long after this season 

No disagreement here.  But can we all at least agree that it's a little weird to have guys in their mid to late 20's competing in college still?  

Share this post


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

Average age for Iowa starting lineup is either 23.3 or 23.49 depending on Assad vs Brands.

Average age for Michigan is 23.22

Did you look up the day/month/year of births to get those numbers, or did you just not use significant digits correctly?  If all you have are their birth years, then all those numbers are the same.

Share this post


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

Did you look up the day/month/year of births to get those numbers, or did you just not use significant digits correctly?  If all you have are their birth years, then all those numbers are the same.

I had averaged the birthday for each team

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Mr. Poopy butthole said:

"Delaying adulthood." What a bunch of crack pot. They're doing what they love to do. How many "adults"  can honestly say that about their jobs? Besides, it's not like many of them were destined for an office job even if the extra year wasn't on the table. I will bet a sandwich that the vast majority of the seniors taking the Covid relief year will stick around in wrestling long after this season 

Are you joking?  College wrestling only exists because it’s subsidized by taxpayers, students, and — at a number of schools — revenue sports.  That is to say, college wrestlers get a rewarding experience — for themselves — at a cost to others who actually produce things.

(I would find it deeply rewarding to go on a round-the-world cruise for a year.  But I don’t expect other people to be forced to subsidize such a trip.)

The upside for college wrestlers is that their athletic pursuits allow them to study at a reduced cost, or even for free.  But if they are not studying anything useful, it’s a waste of resources IMO.

The only possible exception — which is the one you point out — is athletes who hope to become wrestling coaches.  Personally, I don’t think the benefit of sending these men to college for an extra year is worth the cost. If you don’t have a clue after five years, why would a sixth year make a difference?

Edited by Katie

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, Katie said:

The only possible exception — which is the one you point out — is athletes who hope to become wrestling coaches.  Personally, I don’t think the benefit of sending these men to college for an extra year is worth the cost. If you don’t have a clue after five years, why would a sixth year make a difference?

Let's be real, 9/10 don't stay to learn, they stay to compete. 

To be fair to Iowa at least, their wrestling program probably operates in the black (or close to it) so you can't really say they're being subsidized.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
57 minutes ago, Katie said:

Are you joking?  College wrestling only exists because it’s subsidized by taxpayers, students, and — at a number of schools — revenue sports.  That is to say, college wrestlers get a rewarding experience — for themselves — at a cost to others who actually produce things.

(I would find it deeply rewarding to go on a round-the-world cruise for a year.  But I don’t expect other people to be forced to subsidize such a trip.)

The upside for college wrestlers is that their athletic pursuits allow them to study at a reduced cost, or even for free.  But if they are not studying anything useful, it’s a waste of resources IMO.

The only possible exception — which is the one you point out — is athletes who hope to become wrestling coaches.  Personally, I don’t think the benefit of sending these men to college for an extra year is worth the cost. If you don’t have a clue after five years, why would a sixth year make a difference?

Seems to me that we have a difference of opinion on what is "fair" or "beneficial" to society. We might even disagree on things such as "purpose".

You say that college wrestlers get a rewarding experience at a cost to others that "actually" produce things. I disagree. College wrestlers may not produce something tangible, but the entertainment and inspiration that wrestlers provide is a "product" that many people value quite highly, myself included. This extends to athletes of other sports and even members of society that might not fit the definition of labourer - artists, for example.

I think we would agree that being a member of society comes with the expectation that one contributes to that society. I think we disagree on what form that contribution might take.

Your post in this thread, and several others that you made in similar threads, paint a picture of a world that seems to me quite grim, where every individual is valued based on a very strict definition.

I don't want to live in that world. I don't think an individual should be judged strictly on how quickly they bulldoze through their young adult life to become yet another cog in the machine, possible even pressured at the same time to abandon other ambitions.

If we lived under those constraints, then I wonder how many great works of art or technological innovations we would have missed out on because comrade Katie demanded that they move on with their lives.

I like the fact that we live in a world that allows for the possibility of individuals carving out their own unique path, even if it lies outside the constrained bounds of what you deem as appropriate or valuable.

Let the young men pursue what they love most for one more year. The world isn't going to crumble because it is missing out on a couple dozen more pencil pushers, comrade.

 

Share this post


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

Did you look up the day/month/year of births to get those numbers, or did you just not use significant digits correctly?  If all you have are their birth years, then all those numbers are the same.

At least he didn't carry it out to 9 decimal places.  I've seen that, depending on the calculator.

Well played.  2 decimal places implies an accuracy of .005 years, a little less than 2 days.  At least where I went to school...

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...