Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
TBar1977

It's over, it's over, it's all over!!!

Recommended Posts

Tom Brands and Iowa are great!

 

First intelligent thought in over 5800 posts. Really incredible if you think about it. Even if you never have another one, no one can ever take this one away from you. Reminds me of Kyle Dake. No one can ever take those wins away. Ya know what I'm sayin' Tigsy? ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Everyone benefits from stellar recruits. Brands, Cael, Smith, even Gable. Right now, Cael is the best coach in the business.

 

Small quibble. Of course best coach in the business is really not a provable thing. It's more of an opinion based idea. Anyway, my opinion is Cael is not the best coach in the business, but right now he is the best recruiter in the business.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Evaluating who gets the most out of recruits is a very tricky business. It can be very difficult to judge the quality of recruit simply by rankings.

 

There were plenty of guys with greater credentials and higher average rankings throughout HS than Kyle Dake. Does that mean that every higher ranked wrestler was a better recruit than Dake? Kids like Mario Mason, Esposito, Cody Gardner, Bond, Welch, etc.

 

What about Mark Schultz? You could probably come up with 100s of HS wrestlers who were higher ranked recruits than Schultz. Were all those kids greater recruits? Is coaching Schultz to an ncaa title a greater coaching job than taking Zach Sanders to an ncaa title? (I know Sanders didn't win a title, just asking)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Small quibble. I agree with most of what you said. I think we're basically saying the same thing. Anyway, small quibble, Kyle Dake was a very high recruit. He was #4 or #5 overall if I remember correctly. I'm sure someone remembers exactly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Everyone benefits from stellar recruits. Brands, Cael, Smith, even Gable. Right now, Cael is the best coach in the business.

 

Small quibble. Of course best coach in the business is really not a provable thing. It's more of an opinion based idea. Anyway, my opinion is Cael is not the best coach in the business, but right now he is the best recruiter in the business.

 

I think the distinction between best coach and recruiter is almost meaningless. Recruiting is part of coaching, they go hand in hand. I also don't like the slippery slope the distinction causes. In the end, what matters is winning ncaa titles. Since Cael currently is coaching the 3 time defending champions, he's the best. Of course it's technically an opinion, but so is the statement "Dan Gable is a top 10 ncaa coach all time". Or Cael Sanderson is a top 10 ncaa wrestler ever.

 

Going by what I've heard a few say around here, we should just get rid of the word "best".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Small quibble. I agree with most of what you said. I think we're basically saying the same thing. Anyway, small quibble, Kyle Dake was a very high recruit. He was #4 or #5 overall if I remember correctly. I'm sure someone remembers exactly.

 

 

My point still stands. There were many guys with higher HS rankings in the history of the sport than Dake. Are they all necessarily better recruits?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
With the emergence of Grothus at 149, the Hawekeyes may now be the favorites to win the ncaas. I like their chances.

A couple of good showings does not amount to emergence.

Penn State is still the favorite to win NCAAs.

 

 

According to Tom Brands at last evening's press conference "Penn State is in another league"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Everyone benefits from stellar recruits. Brands, Cael, Smith, even Gable. Right now, Cael is the best coach in the business.

 

Small quibble. Of course best coach in the business is really not a provable thing. It's more of an opinion based idea. Anyway, my opinion is Cael is not the best coach in the business, but right now he is the best recruiter in the business.

 

I think the distinction between best coach and recruiter is almost meaningless. Recruiting is part of coaching, they go hand in hand. I also don't like the slippery slope the distinction causes. In the end, what matters is winning ncaa titles. Since Cael currently is coaching the 3 time defending champions, he's the best. Of course it's technically an opinion, but so is the statement "Dan Gable is a top 10 ncaa coach all time". Or Cael Sanderson is a top 10 ncaa wrestler ever.

 

Going by what I've heard a few say around here, we should just get rid of the word "best".

 

 

Being the best recruiter makes it a LOT easier to win, and therefore by your definition, be the best coach. The problem is you are ignoring the fact that you put the biggest Folkstyle name in the recent past (Sanderson) on at team(PSU) that is centered in the INARGUABLE MECCA of High School Wrestling.

 

Sanderson going to PSU changed the demographic of DI wrestling over night. Giving Sanderson the inside track to Pennsylvania recruits IS what put Sanderson over the top as a Championship coach. I have debated topics with you in the past so I know you will somehow skirt what I just stated. However, I cannot see how you can ignore how having an inside track to recruiting is "meaningless" when quantifying coaching. It is NOT the all defining aspect as a coach. It is simply the MOST POWERFUL aspect. If Sanderson wasn't the best recruiter do you think he would still be a 3 time defending Championship coach? If not, how can you say it is meaningless?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Being the best recruiter makes it a LOT easier to win, and therefore by your definition, be the best coach. The problem is you are ignoring the fact that you put the biggest Folkstyle name in the recent past (Sanderson) on at team(PSU) that is centered in the INARGUABLE MECCA of High School Wrestling.

 

Yes, and recruiting is a part of coaching. I'm not ignoring any facts, it's just as I get older, the distinction between recruiting/coaching is becoming more meaningless to me. Yes, Cael's name helps him recruit. The same can be said for Brands, Smith, Gable, Roderick and many others.

 

And PSU does get great recruits, but so does every other top program. And did you see my earlier posts about how it's very difficult to judge the quality of individual recruits?

 

Sanderson going to PSU changed the demographic of DI wrestling over night. Giving Sanderson the inside track to Pennsylvania recruits IS what put Sanderson over the top as a Championship coach. I have debated topics with you in the past so I know you will somehow skirt what I just stated.

 

And being at Iowa is what put Brands "over the top". Being at Okie State put Smith over the top.

 

You make seem as if I have ignored your responses to my posts in the past. Where have I done that? The only topic I can think of where we exchanged posts is the one where we discussed McD's injury. And as I recall, my position was far more consistent with the evidence than your own. Actually, I believe you failed to answer several of the questions that I asked you.

 

However, I cannot see how you can ignore how having an inside track to recruiting is "meaningless" when quantifying coaching. It is NOT the all defining aspect as a coach. It is simply the MOST POWERFUL aspect. If Sanderson wasn't the best recruiter do you think he would still be a 3 time defending Championship coach? If not, how can you say it is meaningless?

 

Every program has advantages and disadvantages. And again, recruiting is part of coaching.

 

If Sanderson wasn't the best recruiter do you think he would still be a 3 time defending Championship coach? If not, how can you say it is meaningless?

 

I already covered a lot of this in a previous thread. Check it out: viewtopic.php?f=11&t=279589&sid=05fcdb0bac0dbbaea391b58568198fdd#p557995

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Cael can coach and recruit but it is hard to remove his brand from the equation to see where he would be if he wasn't such a legend on the mat so every recruit knows him while Flynn wasn't the legend on the mat but man does he build depth and quality athletes in a dump of a town that is miserable to be in that has middle of the road facilities for d2

 

MSU158,

 

The above was a part of comment left on the "Is Rob Koll the best coach in Division 1" topic. My response is below. That should help you to see where I'm coming from.

 

Which raises the question: Is it really meaningful to try to remove his "brand" from the equation? Should there really be a distinction between being a good coach/good recruiter? The playing field will never be completely equal, which is the case in nearly all facets of life.

 

And if we do it here, why not everywhere else? One could argue, for example: "If Logan Stieber weren't so naturally strong/quick, and if he didn't have access to elite training opportunities since he was a preteen, he probably wouldn't place as high at ncaas every year. The kid who started wrestling at 14 years old, at an average high school program, who later goes to a low ranked D1 program, and finishes as a Rd12 is really the better wrestler!"

 

Would we take that argument seriously?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Being the best recruiter makes it a LOT easier to win, and therefore by your definition, be the best coach. The problem is you are ignoring the fact that you put the biggest Folkstyle name in the recent past (Sanderson) on at team(PSU) that is centered in the INARGUABLE MECCA of High School Wrestling.

 

Yes, and recruiting is a part of coaching. I'm not ignoring any facts, it's just as I get older, the distinction between recruiting/coaching is becoming more meaningless to me. Yes, Cael's name helps him recruit. The same can be said for Brands, Smith, Gable, Roderick and many others.

 

And PSU does get great recruits, but so does every other top program. And did you see my earlier posts about how it's very difficult to judge the quality of individual recruits?

 

Sanderson going to PSU changed the demographic of DI wrestling over night. Giving Sanderson the inside track to Pennsylvania recruits IS what put Sanderson over the top as a Championship coach. I have debated topics with you in the past so I know you will somehow skirt what I just stated.

 

And being at Iowa is what put Brands "over the top". Being at Okie State put Smith over the top.

 

You make seem as if I have ignored your responses to my posts in the past. Where have I done that? The only topic I can think of where we exchanged posts is the one where we discussed McD's injury. And as I recall, my position was far more consistent with the evidence than your own. Actually, I believe you failed to answer several of the questions that I asked you.

 

However, I cannot see how you can ignore how having an inside track to recruiting is "meaningless" when quantifying coaching. It is NOT the all defining aspect as a coach. It is simply the MOST POWERFUL aspect. If Sanderson wasn't the best recruiter do you think he would still be a 3 time defending Championship coach? If not, how can you say it is meaningless?

 

Every program has advantages and disadvantages. And again, recruiting is part of coaching.

 

If Sanderson wasn't the best recruiter do you think he would still be a 3 time defending Championship coach? If not, how can you say it is meaningless?

 

I already covered a lot of this in a previous thread. Check it out: viewtopic.php?f=11&t=279589&sid=05fcdb0bac0dbbaea391b58568198fdd#p557995

 

All I can say is debating with you is like debating politics. You have a viewpoint and nothing is going to change it. I believe being a great recruiter is a HUGE factor that can trump any other weaknesses a coach has. You obviously don't believe that so there is no further point arguing.

 

The above reasoning is why I stopped responding regarding McDonough. You say you have facts? Actually everything said by EITHER of us, unless we personally know Brands and McDonough and spent major time with them throughout the season, is CONJECTURE. The ONLY facts are McDonough did not place his senior year and he had surgery quickly after the season was over. You thought McDonough and Brands not wanting to make excuses ABSOLUTELY MEANS that the injury was NOT a major factor in McDonough's drop off as a senior. I tried to point out his biggest weapon throughout his career was his ability to finish takedowns while almost NEVER having a clean, crisp set up to that takedown. I believed his not having that weapon as a senior was a direct result of his injury. You didn't. Again, after debating ad nauseam, I decided there was no point continuing.

 

You are entitled to your opinion. I don't want to load this board up with pointless arguments. I will try to avoid entering into a debate with you unless there is indisputable proof on said topic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
All I can say is debating with you is like debating politics. You have a viewpoint and nothing is going to change it. I believe being a great recruiter is a HUGE factor that can trump any other weaknesses a coach has. You obviously don't believe that so there is no further point arguing.

 

I have changed my viewpoints in the past when given good reasons to do so. It's happened quite a few times over my lifetime. You haven't given me a good reason to change my views MSU158. You haven't proven that your positions are more reasonable than mine.

 

The above reasoning is why I stopped responding regarding McDonough. You say you have facts? Actually everything said by EITHER of us, unless we personally know Brands and McDonough and spent major time with them throughout the season, is CONJECTURE.

 

Yes, I did state facts. And all of my positions were fact based and aligned better with the facts than your own.

 

You thought McDonough and Brands not wanting to make excuses ABSOLUTELY MEANS that the injury was NOT a major factor in McDonough's drop off as a senior.

 

Can you not see your own bias? You came nowhere close to proving that McD said what he said because he didn't want to make excuses. Nowhere close. You won't even consider the possibility that McD was telling the truth. You completely dismiss evidence simply because it doesn't support your biased conclusions. Or so it seems. My position takes into account all of the relevant facts. Anyone who isn't biased can clearly see that.

 

Oh, and where did I say that McD's shoulder injury didn't play a factor? Did you even read through all of my posts before responding?

 

I tried to point out his biggest weapon throughout his career was his ability to finish takedowns while almost NEVER having a clean, crisp set up to that takedown. I believed his not having that weapon as a senior was a direct result of his injury. You didn't.

 

As I recall, I brought up that very same move that you are talking about before you did on that very same thread! I've pointed that out on several occasions in the past. Look at my posts on that thread. First mention of McD's "extended shot" is on page 3. Again, did you even read my posts? And can you point out where I said that McD's shoulder didn't affect his ability to execute that shot?

 

 

Again, after debating ad nauseam, I decided there was no point continuing.

 

We would have probably had more to talk about if you had read my posts properly. And if you were willing to follow the evidence wherever it lead. It truly is a shame that you start with your conclusions and then try to find facts to support them, rather than drawing a conclusion after you've thoroughly gone over the facts. That's completely backwards MSU158.

 

 

You are entitled to your opinion. I don't want to load this board up with pointless arguments. I will try to avoid entering into a debate with you unless there is indisputable proof on said topic.

 

I'd appreciate it if you stopped trying to debate me until you are willing to have a meaningful discussion. A discussion where you let go of your biases and let the facts speak. A discussion where you don't begin with your conclusion and toss aside evidence that you don't like. If you can't do that, we have nothing to discuss.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can understand why Gonzo and many other Iowa fans are excited about how Grothus has emerged at 149 but has he done anything that several of the non rated PSU recruits haven't done already? Gingrich wasn't a top 100 recruit yet he is just a hair behind Lawson and would be ranked about the same (12) if he was starting. Vollrath never finished higher then 4th in high school and has defeated Deringer and many other guys that were considered much better recruits. Conaway was another non 100 recruit (109, 1 place behind Grothus) and he finished round of 12 up a weight as a freshman. Beitz (not even 150?), as a back up 141, bumped up to 149 and defeated a rated recruit in Kelly (and Paddock); and how about Matt Brown, he was rated #88 coming out of high school (lower then Kelly). Clearly, if you look at what Sanderson has done with these type of recruits on his roster in an objective manner, I don't see how it's possible to say Brands does a better job of developing when, if anything, the evidence points in the other direction.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow, I deleted me post and the debate still took off!? I think if you look at what Sanderson has done with the lower rated recruits on his roster, I don't see how it's possible to say Brands does a better job. Gingrich wasn't a top 100 recruit yet he is just a hair behind Lawson and would be ranked about the same if he was starting. Vollrath never finished higher then 4th in high school and has defeated Deringer and many other guys that were considered much better recruits. Conaway was barely ranked and finished round of 12 up a weight as a freshman. Beitz, as a back up 141, bumped up to 149 and defeated a much higher rated recruit in Kelly (and Paddock). I can understand why Gonzo and many other Iowa fans are excited about how Grothus has emerged at 149 but has he done anything that several of the PSU guys haven't done already? Also, there is something to be said for developing your blue chips to their highest potential and I think it's clear Cael has a decisive advantage in this area.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow, I deleted me post and the debate still took off!? I think if you look at what Sanderson has done with the lower rated recruits on his roster, I don't see how it's possible to say Brands does a better job. Gingrich wasn't a top 100 recruit yet he is just a hair behind Lawson and would be ranked about the same if he was starting. Vollrath never finished higher then 4th in high school and has defeated Deringer and many other guys that were considered much better recruits. Conaway was barely ranked and finished round of 12 up a weight as a freshman. Beitz, as a back up 141, bumped up to 149 and defeated a much higher rated recruit in Kelly (and Paddock). I can understand why Gonzo and many other Iowa fans are excited about how Grothus has emerged at 149 but has he done anything that several of the PSU guys haven't done already? Also, there is something to be said for developing your blue chips to their highest potential and I think it's clear Cael has a decisive advantage in this area.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I can understand why Gonzo and many other Iowa fans are excited about how Grothus has emerged at 149 but has he done anything that several of the non rated PSU recruits haven't done already? Gingrich wasn't a top 100 recruit yet he is just a hair behind Lawson and would be ranked about the same (12) if he was starting. Vollrath never finished higher then 4th in high school and has defeated Deringer and many other guys that were considered much better recruits. Conaway was another non 100 recruit (109, 1 place behind Grothus) and he finished round of 12 up a weight as a freshman. Beitz (not even 150?), as a back up 141, bumped up to 149 and defeated a rated recruit in Kelly (and Paddock); and how about Matt Brown, he was rated #88 coming out of high school (lower then Kelly). Clearly, if you look at what Sanderson has done with these type of recruits on his roster in an objective manner, I don't see how it's possible to say Brands does a better job of developing when, if anything, the evidence points in the other direction.

 

I think Iowa does a decent job developing talent, but it just shows you how insecure Iowa fans are that they try to extrapolate that into an aspect in which they outdo PSU. The reality is that of all college recruiting rankings from 2008 to 2013, Iowa's class has been ranked higher than PSU's in every year except one. And Iowa had two #1 classes during that period, to none for PSU. Recruiting alone doesn't account for PSU's titles -- in fact its hard to make the argument that they've even out-recruited Iowa. The reality is that PSU has an awfully good track record of developing that talent -- whether its making NCAA champs and finalists out of blue chippers, or AA caliber wrestlers out of mid-grade recruits.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I think Iowa does a decent job developing talent, but it just shows you how insecure Iowa fans are that they try to extrapolate that into an aspect in which they outdo PSU. The reality is that of all college recruiting rankings from 2008 to 2013, Iowa's class has been ranked higher than PSU's in every year except one. And Iowa had two #1 classes during that period, to none for PSU. Recruiting alone doesn't account for PSU's titles -- in fact its hard to make the argument that they've even out-recruited Iowa. The reality is that PSU has an awfully good track record of developing that talent -- whether its making NCAA champs and finalists out of blue chippers, or AA caliber wrestlers out of mid-grade recruits.

 

This is a distortion. Compare overall high school ranks of the PSU and Iowa starters:

 

Nico #3 - Gilman #16/Clark #23

Gulibon #3 - Ramos #? (3rd team Asics All-American)

Retherford #3 - Dziewa #12

A. Alton #2 - Grothus #108/Kelly #74

D. Alton #8 - DSJ #? (honorable mention Asics All-American)

Taylor #1 - Moore #11

Brown #? - Evans #4

Ruth #(high!)(1st team All-American) - El ? (3rd team All-American)

McIntosh #1 - Burak ? (can't find him)

Lawson #22 - Telford #19

 

Iowa is not recruiting in the same league as PSU. The overall rank is where to look - not the weight class rank. Dziewa and David Tayor were both ranked #1 in their high school weight class. Does that mean Iowa and Penn State got equivalent recruits?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

recruiting is far and away the thing that MAKES coaches. If you recruit the best your team will be the best.

I learned the most from practicing with with the best. When the coach IS the best you learn bunches form them...when the coach isn't you don't.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Iowa is not recruiting in the same league as PSU. The overall rank is where to look - not the weight class rank. Dziewa and David Tayor were both ranked #1 in their high school weight class. Does that mean Iowa and Penn State got equivalent recruits?

 

Eric Grajales had a higher recruiting ranking than Dake, Ruth, Perry, Ramos, and St. John. Did Michigan get a better individual recruit than Cornell, Penn State, Okie State, and Iowa?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Some of the PSU faithful seem to be downplaying the proven, very elite HS talent they are signing. Sure, some don't pan out as predicted. But many of these guys do go on to be collegiate superstars. Metcalf certainly helped Iowa. Taylor and Ruth have elevated PSU to the peak.

 

The current signings demonstrate how PSU is leading in this kind of recruiting. If you limit things to the top 2 ranked HS kids at each weight you see:

 

PSU - #1 Nickal 182#

#1 Nevillis Hwt

(they did have #1 Marsteller for a while)

#2 Nolf 145#

 

Okla St- #1 Marsteller 170#

#1 Blees 160#

 

Minn - #2 Rose 195#

 

Northwestern is having a banner recruiting class -

#1 Micic 126#

#1 Brill 152#

 

Iowa does not yet have a #1 or #2 ranked kid signed.

 

It doesn't mean that Cael doesn't develop talent. Clearly he does. But you can also acknowledge what incredible talent he is starting with.

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...