Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
JerseyJoey

Taylor is never going to beat Dake

Recommended Posts

This doesn't make Taylor better than Dake, but it IS within reach and it clearly makes Taylor one of the ten best of all time if he can make it happen. Taylor can end his college career as the all time points leader in NCAA tournament history. That will be quite the feat if he can make it happen for a two time winner.

 

I disagree completely that would make Taylor clearly a top 10 wrestler ever. So many great wrestlers have to be ignored for that to be the case. So many.

 

This. "Clearly" is the problem with that statement. "Arguably" might work.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This doesn't make Taylor better than Dake, but it IS within reach and it clearly makes Taylor one of the ten best of all time if he can make it happen. Taylor can end his college career as the all time points leader in NCAA tournament history. That will be quite the feat if he can make it happen for a two time winner.

 

I disagree completely that would make Taylor clearly a top 10 wrestler ever. So many great wrestlers have to be ignored for that to be the case. So many.

 

So let me get this straight. Assuming Taylor does what I suggest he might do, and it is well within his reach to do this ... from a team points perspective he will have outscored every college wrestler who ever wrestled in this sport. All of them.

 

And you don't believe he would be a top ten wrestler? Ok, whatever. I disagree.

 

 

EDIT: I am basing the scoring points at NCAA Championships off of a thread that appeared here that had a list of all time point scorers at NCAA's. I am assuming that list is accurate, but I can't verify it is so. If it is, then it appears Taylor can pin out next year and take the lead.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This doesn't make Taylor better than Dake, but it IS within reach and it clearly makes Taylor one of the ten best of all time if he can make it happen. Taylor can end his college career as the all time points leader in NCAA tournament history. That will be quite the feat if he can make it happen for a two time winner.

 

I disagree completely that would make Taylor clearly a top 10 wrestler ever. So many great wrestlers have to be ignored for that to be the case. So many.

 

So let me get this straight. Assuming Taylor does what I suggest he might do, and it is well within his reach to do this ... from a team points perspective he will have outscored every college wrestler who ever wrestled in this sport. All of them.

 

And you don't believe he would be a top ten wrestler? Ok, whatever. I disagree.

 

Other people have wrestled under different scoring rules with smaller brackets, just for one quick chink in your weaksauce argument.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This doesn't make Taylor better than Dake, but it IS within reach and it clearly makes Taylor one of the ten best of all time if he can make it happen. Taylor can end his college career as the all time points leader in NCAA tournament history. That will be quite the feat if he can make it happen for a two time winner.

 

 

So let me get this straight. Assuming Taylor does what I suggest he might do, and it is well within his reach to do this ... from a team points perspective he will have outscored every college wrestler who ever wrestled in this sport. All of them.

 

And you don't believe he would be a top ten wrestler? Ok, whatever. I disagree.

 

Other people have wrestled under different scoring rules with smaller brackets, just for one quick chink in your weaksauce argument.

 

 

How has the NCAA tournaments rules changed over time?

 

I get some peoples bracket being smaller but that is obvious.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Only Win 2 Titles"

 

"Only Win 4 Big Ten Titles"

 

"Only be a 4x NCAA Finalist"

 

"Only have losses against other NCAA Champions"

 

Hey.. we cant all be perfect like Cael.

 

Knocking on Taylor with these statements is like knocking on Dake for "Only" winning 3 conference titles. Remember he lost in his conference finals his sophomore year?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This doesn't make Taylor better than Dake, but it IS within reach and it clearly makes Taylor one of the ten best of all time if he can make it happen. Taylor can end his college career as the all time points leader in NCAA tournament history. That will be quite the feat if he can make it happen for a two time winner.

 

I disagree completely that would make Taylor clearly a top 10 wrestler ever. So many great wrestlers have to be ignored for that to be the case. So many.

 

This. "Clearly" is the problem with that statement. "Arguably" might work.

-----

 

I'll second this. If Taylor runs the table and dominates his matches all season, one could "argue"... but it's iffy, imo. You have to drop someone else from the top 10 all time list to make room for Taylor. That could be a problem.

 

But as of today, it's only a hypothetical. For now, we have the "real world" results:

 

RS fr - lost by fall in finals

RS soph - won by TF in finals

RS Jr - lost by dec in finals

 

1 for 3 in ncaa finals does not look good for the "all time top 10" list. 2 for 4 looks better, but even that is rather weak for top 10. If Ruth runs the table and dominates as well, why should Taylor be on the list and not Ruth?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If Ruth runs the table and dominates as well, why should Taylor be on the list and not Ruth?

 

Because opponents matter. I'm not saying Ruth shouldn't be ahead of Taylor, but saying that Taylor should not qualify for the short list to be considered top 10 just because he lost to Dake is an unfairly high bar. How many NCAA champions wrestled an opponent of senior year Dake's caliber in the NCAA finals? The list is very, very small, maybe just a handful throughout history.

 

Was Alan Fried "just" a 1x NCAA champion?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If Ruth runs the table and dominates as well, why should Taylor be on the list and not Ruth?

 

Because opponents matter. I'm not saying Ruth shouldn't be ahead of Taylor, but saying that Taylor should not qualify for the short list to be considered top 10 just because he lost to Dake is an unfairly high bar. How many NCAA champions wrestled an opponent of senior year Dake's caliber in the NCAA finals? The list is very, very small, maybe just a handful throughout history.

 

Was Alan Fried "just" a 1x NCAA champion?

 

For the purposes of discussing who the very best collegiate wrestlers of all time are, yes, Alan Fried was just a two time champion. There is an ridiculously high standard for something like that, and with three 4 time champions and several more three time champions, Taylor just can't qualify for that kind of list. There's just too many guys who accomplished more than he did.

 

And Taylor didn't only lose to Dake, he also lost to Bubba Jenkins, who while a good college wrestler isn't close to being an all-timer, and had lost that season to an NAIA wrestler along with a couple of other losses. Taylor simply can't qualify for this kind of list based on tournament scoring that clearly favors wrestling in this era. More points for placement, more bonus opportunities, bigger brackets, etc. It's not a grave insult to a man's wrestling capabilities to say he's not one of the 10 best ever. Lots of great wrestlers aren't among the 10 best ever.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
For the purposes of discussing who the very best collegiate wrestlers of all time are, yes, Alan Fried was just a two time champion. There is an ridiculously high standard for something like that, and with three 4 time champions and several more three time champions, Taylor just can't qualify for that kind of list. There's just too many guys who accomplished more than he did.

 

And Taylor didn't only lose to Dake, he also lost to Bubba Jenkins, who while a good college wrestler isn't close to being an all-timer, and had lost that season to an NAIA wrestler along with a couple of other losses. Taylor simply can't qualify for this kind of list based on tournament scoring that clearly favors wrestling in this era. More points for placement, more bonus opportunities, bigger brackets, etc. It's not a grave insult to a man's wrestling capabilities to say he's not one of the 10 best ever. Lots of great wrestlers aren't among the 10 best ever.

 

Vak, Fried was a 1x'er, which underscores my point that it isn't exclusively about hardware. On paper, sure, Fried is a 1x'er, just like hundreds of others. (Being an AA, let alone an actual champ even once, is an exceptionally impressive accomplishment, so I'm not knocking anyone here....) But in actuality, Fried was very significantly better than his one title showed. Of his very few losses in college, all but one were to Tom Brands. And the way he wrestled against the rest of the field was quite telling. He also had significant success in freestyle throughout his college career that pointed to his level of relative skill being very high.

 

I'm not making the case that Taylor is or isn't top 10 of all time. Like I said, I don't really have a strong opinion either way right now. But I think that while hardware is really important, it is not the only factor in ranking guys, especially when opponents who were top 3 of all time are part of the consideration.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Taylor is in my top 10 list if he finishes next year like he has in all of his other matches minus Dake (possibly best ever) and Bubba. If we're talking just collegiate wrestling over the past 15 years, I have Taylor behind Dake and Cael. That's pretty much it. You can certainly make arguments for guys like Abas, Williams, Jones, Askren and Ruth but I'll take DT over them if he runs the table again this year. These lists are all personal opinions anyway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If we're talking just collegiate wrestling over the past 15 years, I have Taylor behind Dake and Cael. That's pretty much it. You can certainly make arguments for guys like Abas, Williams, Jones, Askren and Ruth but I'll take DT over them if he runs the table again this year. These lists are all personal opinions anyway.

 

Stephen Neal?

Jordan Burroughs?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If we're talking just collegiate wrestling over the past 15 years, I have Taylor behind Dake and Cael. That's pretty much it. You can certainly make arguments for guys like Abas, Williams, Jones, Askren and Ruth but I'll take DT over them if he runs the table again this year. These lists are all personal opinions anyway.

 

Stephen Neal?

Jordan Burroughs?

 

Over the 4 years of college I think DT will stack up good against Neal and JB IF he wins another title in dominating fashion.

 

Neal is a World champ and JB is a World+Olympic champ but they weren't nearly as dominant as DT in their 1st and second years in college. They both were... 2x champs right? Amazing accomplishments but not 4x finalists 2x champs with the # of techs/pins/majors as DT. And neither had one of the three 4x NCAA champs in their weight!

 

Tom Brands accomplishments are even more mind boggling given he had someone like Alan Fried to contend with.

 

Fried is considered "good enough" to have been a 4x'er had Brands not been there. TB still ended up with 3 NCAA titles and a World/Olympic champ.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If Ruth and Taylor both run the table, I don't see a good argument for Taylor over Ruth. Ruth will have more titles and will have them over better opponents. Ruth will have 3 straight undefeated years, Taylor lost 3 times as a junior. Ruth will have the 1 loss at the NCAAs that was an injury default he later avenged.

 

Taylor is at best going to finish with the same credentials as Mocco. Mocco's 2 NCAA losses were to opponents who weren't as good as Dake, but they were better than Bubba.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think we often base opinions solely off wins and losses or titles and often times these are against non common opponents in completely different setting. We are losing the ability as wrestling fans to objectively watch someone compete and then draw a conclusion on who is a better wrestler based on actully watching someone wrestle.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think we often base opinions solely off wins and losses or titles and often times these are against non common opponents in completely different setting. We are losing the ability as wrestling fans to objectively watch someone compete and then draw a conclusion on who is a better wrestler based on actully watching someone wrestle.

 

Why do you say this? Can you give an example where it's clear that this ability is being lost?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The problem with this distinction is that he 'only' wins 2 titles with all that scoring.

 

It services to underscore that he can't close the deal. Coffee is for closers.

 

 

I disagree.

 

If not for Kyle Dake, a guy many here call the GOAT, he'd get 3 titles. I would suggest that by definition, guys number 2 thru 9 on the all time top ten list, would all have fewer titles if they had to wrestle the GOAT for one of them. This is the same thing that happened to Fried going up against Brands. By the words of Dake's biggest supporters this is what happened to Taylor.

 

Also, there can be little debate that Taylor's insane level of point scoring, even in a runner up year in 2013, was a huge part of Penn State beating Oklahoma State for the title. That counts for something in my book.

 

Finally, the other wrestlers at Penn State feed off of Taylor's enthusiasm and energy. His presence makes them better. I know some people will scoff at this, but we all have met people who make us want to be better at what we do and who we are. Taylor is one such person.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If Ruth runs the table and dominates as well, why should Taylor be on the list and not Ruth?

 

Because opponents matter. I'm not saying Ruth shouldn't be ahead of Taylor, but saying that Taylor should not qualify for the short list to be considered top 10 just because he lost to Dake is an unfairly high bar. How many NCAA champions wrestled an opponent of senior year Dake's caliber in the NCAA finals? The list is very, very small, maybe just a handful throughout history.

 

Was Alan Fried "just" a 1x NCAA champion?

 

For the purposes of discussing who the very best collegiate wrestlers of all time are, yes, Alan Fried was just a two time champion. There is an ridiculously high standard for something like that, and with three 4 time champions and several more three time champions, Taylor just can't qualify for that kind of list. There's just too many guys who accomplished more than he did.

 

And Taylor didn't only lose to Dake, he also lost to Bubba Jenkins, who while a good college wrestler isn't close to being an all-timer, and had lost that season to an NAIA wrestler along with a couple of other losses. Taylor simply can't qualify for this kind of list based on tournament scoring that clearly favors wrestling in this era. More points for placement, more bonus opportunities, bigger brackets, etc. It's not a grave insult to a man's wrestling capabilities to say he's not one of the 10 best ever. Lots of great wrestlers aren't among the 10 best ever.

 

Vak I usually agree with a lot of what you post, and more so with the rationale and reasoning behind it...but this statement is totally unfair.

 

The point being made was that Taylor is not a 2 time champion right now only because he happened to be in the same weight class a Dake - who happens to be a top 3 college wrestler of all time. This is a fact. Taylor's second NCAA title right now was blocked only because one of the [other?] best wrestlers of all time met him in the finals last year. For you to nit-pick and say "well, he also lost to Bubba so that argument doesn't fly" is not fair in the slightest, and is basically a non sequitur to the point being made (by the way - Taylor's only losses are to Bubba and Dake...that's all of them - so that stands for something in and of itself). Bubba was an NCAA champion and two time finalist (also a Junior World team member I believe?) ... he was no slouch. Plus - playing the "he lost to a weaker looking opponent so he can't qualify for 'this kind of list' " game is silly - all that need to be done is point to one (or two) of Dake's losses and you can see that clearly...Kevin LeValley is nowhere near as good/accomplished as Bubba even.

 

Everything else you discussed, fine you can argue and have decent points. I am not even saying Taylor is for sure a top 10 of all time (assuming he runs the table and dominates this year), thought I for sure think a legitimate case can certainly be made for him. But this specific point really rubbed me wrong and I think it is extremely unfair and unwarranted.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If Ruth and Taylor both run the table, I don't see a good argument for Taylor over Ruth. Ruth will have more titles and will have them over better opponents. Ruth will have 3 straight undefeated years, Taylor lost 3 times as a junior. Ruth will have the 1 loss at the NCAAs that was an injury default he later avenged.

 

Taylor is at best going to finish with the same credentials as Mocco. Mocco's 2 NCAA losses were to opponents who weren't as good as Dake, but they were better than Bubba.

 

I just wanna be clear up front I am not attempting to make an argument for one of them over the other...just pointing something out. WOW :shock: ...that was an extremely slick attempt to slip that by. Saying "Taylor lost 3 times as a Junior" is ridiculous in the context you are putting it...it has to be noted who he lost to those 3 times...one of them being an exhibition match before the season...and all 3 of them being to Kyle Dake (Ruth has never faced anyone of this caliber), in double OT once and by 1 point twice.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If Ruth and Taylor both run the table, I don't see a good argument for Taylor over Ruth. Ruth will have more titles and will have them over better opponents. Ruth will have 3 straight undefeated years, Taylor lost 3 times as a junior. Ruth will have the 1 loss at the NCAAs that was an injury default he later avenged.

 

Taylor is at best going to finish with the same credentials as Mocco. Mocco's 2 NCAA losses were to opponents who weren't as good as Dake, but they were better than Bubba.

 

I just wanna be clear up front I am not attempting to make an argument for one of them over the other...just pointing something out. WOW :shock: ...that was an extremely slick attempt to slip that by. Saying "Taylor lost 3 times as a Junior" is ridiculous in the context you are putting it...it has to be noted who he lost to those 3 times...one of them being an exhibition match before the season...and all 3 of them being to Kyle Dake (Ruth has never faced anyone of this caliber), in double OT once and by 1 point twice.

 

 

IMO, this can't be stressed enough. The margin between Dake and Taylor is razor thin. If Dake is in the convo re: GOAT, then Taylor must be pretty damn good himself if he can beat the snot out of everyone else and be this close to the guy in the GOAT conversation.

 

Taylor is liable to average 5+ points per match next year for all his critics know.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If we're talking just collegiate wrestling over the past 15 years, I have Taylor behind Dake and Cael. That's pretty much it. You can certainly make arguments for guys like Abas, Williams, Jones, Askren and Ruth but I'll take DT over them if he runs the table again this year. These lists are all personal opinions anyway.

 

Stephen Neal?

Jordan Burroughs?

 

Over the 4 years of college I think DT will stack up good against Neal and JB IF he wins another title in dominating fashion.

 

Neal is a World champ and JB is a World+Olympic champ but they weren't nearly as dominant as DT in their 1st and second years in college. They both were... 2x champs right? Amazing accomplishments but not 4x finalists 2x champs with the # of techs/pins/majors as DT. And neither had one of the three 4x NCAA champs in their weight!

 

Tom Brands accomplishments are even more mind boggling given he had someone like Alan Fried to contend with.

 

Fried is considered "good enough" to have been a 4x'er had Brands not been there. TB still ended up with 3 NCAA titles and a World/Olympic champ.

 

----

 

Sounds like a lot of various opinions on this matter.

 

I think one thing we can all agree on... Tom Brands must be on the all time top 10 list. ;-)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Vak I usually agree with a lot of what you post, and more so with the rationale and reasoning behind it...but this statement is totally unfair.

 

The point being made was that Taylor is not a 2 time champion right now only because he happened to be in the same weight class a Dake - who happens to be a top 3 college wrestler of all time. This is a fact. Taylor's second NCAA title right now was blocked only because one of the [other?] best wrestlers of all time met him in the finals last year. For you to nit-pick and say "well, he also lost to Bubba so that argument doesn't fly" is not fair in the slightest, and is basically a non sequitur to the point being made (by the way - Taylor's only losses are to Bubba and Dake...that's all of them - so that stands for something in and of itself). Bubba was an NCAA champion and two time finalist (also a Junior World team member I believe?) ... he was no slouch. Plus - playing the "he lost to a weaker looking opponent so he can't qualify for 'this kind of list' " game is silly - all that need to be done is point to one (or two) of Dake's losses and you can see that clearly...Kevin LeValley is nowhere near as good/accomplished as Bubba even.

 

Everything else you discussed, fine you can argue and have decent points. I am not even saying Taylor is for sure a top 10 of all time (assuming he runs the table and dominates this year), thought I for sure think a legitimate case can certainly be made for him. But this specific point really rubbed me wrong and I think it is extremely unfair and unwarranted.

 

Bubba was a world Jr champ.

Its funny how things work out. If Bubba would have gotten his way and stayed at PSU, Taylor would have been 165. He would have been totally destroyed by JB and Howe. He would have finished fourth at best. Would we still be having this discussion?

He is a great wrestler, but not top ten of all time. I would not put Taylor in the top five this century. Certainly he is behind Sanderson, Dake and Burroughs. I would also put him behind Ed Ruth, Ben Askren and Stephen Abas. If he can roll through the season next year, I would put him in the same group as Pendleton, Metcalf, Hendricks and Jones. Possibly others.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bubba was a world Jr champ.

Its funny how things work out. If Bubba would have gotten his way and stayed at PSU, Taylor would have been 165. He would have been totally destroyed by JB and Howe. He would have finished fourth at best. Would we still be having this discussion?

He is a great wrestler, but not top ten of all time. I would not put Taylor in the top five this century. Certainly he is behind Sanderson, Dake and Burroughs. I would also put him behind Ed Ruth, Ben Askren and Stephen Abas. If he can roll through the season next year, I would put him in the same group as Pendleton, Metcalf, Hendricks and Jones. Possibly others.

 

First, that is completely baseless and unfounded...so I can't even say anything in response.

 

Secondly, yes he is "certainly" behind Sanderson and Dake...but Burroughs? Please make that argument. When you do though, do not forget that we are talking about a list of NCAA wrestlers, and comparing NCAA careers. If we were talking internationally too...then Burroughs is ahead...but we aren't...so he isn't. Burroughs is not in the same group as Sanderson and Dake when it comes to NCAA careers - he just flat out isn't. Taylor's NCAA career compared to Burrough's is not really all that close (assuming he wins this year in the fashion he probably should). Taylor is going to walk through this year (barring injury)...and like Burrough's he will be a two time champ - but he will clearly edge him out in the dominace department (overall), the fact that he was also a two time finalist along with his two titles, and the fact that in one of those finals he lost to one of the greatest NCAA wrestlers of all time, by a point, which kept him from winning 3 titles. By any standards Burroughs is not above Taylor, or even Askren for that matter, in terms of NCAA careers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bubba was a world Jr champ.

Its funny how things work out. If Bubba would have gotten his way and stayed at PSU, Taylor would have been 165. He would have been totally destroyed by JB and Howe. He would have finished fourth at best. Would we still be having this discussion?

He is a great wrestler, but not top ten of all time. I would not put Taylor in the top five this century. Certainly he is behind Sanderson, Dake and Burroughs. I would also put him behind Ed Ruth, Ben Askren and Stephen Abas. If he can roll through the season next year, I would put him in the same group as Pendleton, Metcalf, Hendricks and Jones. Possibly others.

 

First, that is completely baseless and unfounded...so I can't even say anything in response.

 

Secondly, yes he is "certainly" behind Sanderson and Dake...but Burroughs? Please make that argument. When you do though, do not forget that we are talking about a list of NCAA wrestlers, and comparing NCAA careers. If we were talking internationally too...then Burroughs is ahead...but we aren't...so he isn't. Burroughs is not in the same group as Sanderson and Dake when it comes to NCAA careers - he just flat out isn't. Taylor's NCAA career compared to Burrough's is not really all that close (assuming he wins this year in the fashion he probably should). Taylor is going to walk through this year (barring injury)...and like Burrough's he will be a two time champ - but he will clearly edge him out in the dominace department (overall), the fact that he was also a two time finalist along with his two titles, and the fact that in one of those finals he lost to one of the greatest NCAA wrestlers of all time, by a point, which kept him from winning 3 titles. By any standards Burroughs is not above Taylor, or even Askren for that matter, in terms of NCAA careers.

 

You're trying to have it both ways. Burroughs can't be ahead of Taylor or Askren because they will have better credentials, but Taylor can be ahead of a bunch of wrestlers with better credentials because you feel he was more dominant (or under the original flawed argument put forth by someone else, because he will have scored the most points in the NCAA tournament, maybe).

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...