Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
JohnnyThompsonnum1

Observation about Eric Grajales

Recommended Posts

JT ... do yourself a favor and stop arguing with olddirty. He's got the first hand knowledge on things and can back his opinion with hands-on blood, sweat and tears with some of the worlds best athletes.

 

There are people, wrestlers and non wrestlers who give it their absolute all and work a lot harder in life and fail, than others who don't work as hard and succeed. It's what the saying, "Life isn't fair" is all about. He can have all the knowledge in the world that he wants. It is a fact, that sometimes in life people work extremely hard and fail. If you don't like it, tough. I'm not going to sit here and abide to someone who preaches that hard work always ends in success. It doesn't. For him to point a finger at every college kid that ever didn't win an NCAA title, or didn't AA, and narrow it strictly down to "they didn't work hard enough" and then to not assume but "know" that everyone who did get a title or an AA, "Worked harder than they did" is an insult not only to them but to the way life often is. I have first hand knowledge of this myself as well as observational knowledge. You never knew a guy in school that could get A's without studying or putting in any extra time beyond class, while other kids would study and study and study and go to study groups just to get by with a C? Whether you knew any of them or not, they exist. According to Olddirty those types of things don't happen. Well, I have knowledge on things that they do and can back up my opinion that they do, because I've seen them, I see them and I will continue to see them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Side note, I am curious how a kid can spend 5 or 6 years in college with a general studies major. What do you do with a general studies degree and how could it take 5 or 6 years?

I was curious about this, so I looked it up. General studies is michigans version of an independent major. It should have the same prospects as any other liberal arts major. Perhaps more if he designed his program around something marketable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

JT, I think you may be too stuck on the dedication part. The point I tried to make and Olddirty is further elaborating on is how, in Ruth's case, BOTH dedication and preparation go hand in hand. With the situation he has at PSU, the environment he is in has maximized both. He CANNOT simply coast. He has to, by what he is exposed to on a daily basis, give his best or get blown away. You are arguing SOOO hard for the blue collar "RUDY" type that you are missing the OVERALL point.

 

There ABSOLUTELY are wrestlers who give the MAXIMUM dedication they can and come up way short. No one is disputing that. We are simply POINTING OUT that the best DO NOT just get there on their talent alone. They still have to work and prepare VERY, VERY HARD!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I will try to expound a bit more for you, JT.

 

The working hard argument actually works at the High School level. I used to use it to try to recruit new freshman. I would explain how in many sports like football, basketball, baseball, etc.. the better athlete will almost always win. If the guy is stronger, bigger and runs a 4.4 forty, you can drill until you are blue in the face but he will beat you almost every time. If the guy is 6'5" and you are 5'8", unless the 6'5" guy has little to no coordination, he is going to be dunking all over you. In baseball you can't really train a rocket arm. Hand eye coordination is a natural ability and you can only hone your ability so much.

 

In wrestling at the High School level, you have weight classes that can greatly reduce the strength difference and nearly eliminate any size advantage. So the only tangible thing the other guy may naturally have over you is talent. At the high school age you can outwork 99% of your competition. A hard worker has a legitimate chance to beat the super talented stud, if he isn't super dedicated. This is because there are only a select few that have the dedication and preparation that is needed.

 

In college, especially DI, the above paragraph RARELY applies. ALL of these guys are talented and they HAVE TO stay dedicated and prepared or they have little to no success. It is even possible they end up losing their scholarships or off the team altogether.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Side note, I am curious how a kid can spend 5 or 6 years in college with a general studies major. What do you do with a general studies degree and how could it take 5 or 6 years?

I was curious about this, so I looked it up. General studies is michigans version of an independent major. It should have the same prospects as any other liberal arts major. Perhaps more if he designed his program around something marketable.

 

Another poster linked a c.2009 (?) article about Grajales as he graduated high school. He allegedly had aspirations to go into business and apply to a specific business college while at Michigan. It seems that he doesn't just struggle with discipline in his wrestling training.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Msu158 - I don't have a problem with what you are saying. However Oddity is making a direct connotation with hardwork and success; blatantly ignoring all other factors that go into whether a person fails or succeeds. His argument is that the reason Ed Ruth will win the NCAA title is because he is working harder than every other 184 lbs wrestler. That I take issue with because it insults wrestler working just as hard and harder.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
JT ... do yourself a favor and stop arguing with olddirty. He's got the first hand knowledge on things and can back his opinion with hands-on blood, sweat and tears with some of the worlds best athletes.

 

There are people, wrestlers and non wrestlers who give it their absolute all and work a lot harder in life and fail, than others who don't work as hard and succeed. It's what the saying, "Life isn't fair" is all about. He can have all the knowledge in the world that he wants. It is a fact, that sometimes in life people work extremely hard and fail. If you don't like it, tough. I'm not going to sit here and abide to someone who preaches that hard work always ends in success. It doesn't. For him to point a finger at every college kid that ever didn't win an NCAA title, or didn't AA, and narrow it strictly down to "they didn't work hard enough" and then to not assume but "know" that everyone who did get a title or an AA, "Worked harder than they did" is an insult not only to them but to the way life often is. I have first hand knowledge of this myself as well as observational knowledge. You never knew a guy in school that could get A's without studying or putting in any extra time beyond class, while other kids would study and study and study and go to study groups just to get by with a C? Whether you knew any of them or not, they exist. According to Olddirty those types of things don't happen. Well, I have knowledge on things that they do and can back up my opinion that they do, because I've seen them, I see them and I will continue to see them.

 

You're missing the point of what Holt is telling you. You are defining "hard work" differently than he is. He's talking about a select group of eight or fewer D.1 wrestlers in a given weight class. Any edge that any one of those guys has over the other guys in that group, especially in the present environment where most of the top teams condition similarly and there is nearly unlimited easy access to resources on technique, is likely very small. Hard work in the sense of running, lifting, wrestling, putting in the time, etc., is a given. Dedication is a given. Mastery of wrestling fundamentals is a given. Natural ability of at least a certain level is a given. There are outliers, of course, but as a general rule this is true.

 

All Holt is saying is that Ruth's particular edge, or at least his greatest edge, lies in the quality of the program around him. When Ruth goes to practice, he has to be just a split second quicker every time. He has to be just a little more inventive in every situation. He can't go to the same move over and over. He's surrounded by guys who are, for the lack of a better word, pros of very high caliber. The intensity and rigor in that room, at that weight, is simply the best situation in the nation right now. Put Ruth in a different program and he's still an outstanding wrestler with huge natural ability, but he's probably not the wrestler we've seen at PSU. He'd still be sprinting as "hard," lifting as "hard," wrestling as "hard," but the edge he has through the rigor and intensity supplied by his particular training partners and environment would be smaller or perhaps gone altogether.

 

Your high school example is an irrelevant, apples and oranges comparison. High school is not comprised of an elite group of people with similar baselines of work ethic, conditioning, ability, dedication, etc. It's a melting pot of people who vary greatly in those respects, so the "edge" of any particular student over his or her classmates in terms of any of those factors is potentially HUGE.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Since this has been hijacked, I will say that I know firsthand that despite Bubba J's success, he was the least hardest worker in the Penn State Room.

 

I would be willing to bet that he was nowhere near the least hard worker in the ASU room, though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not taking sides but I will say that there are those that are extremely talented and are able to be very successful without being the hardest worker in the roomor even having great workout partners. How do you explain the success of a Darrion Caldwell? He had no workout partners(compared with Iowa, Psu, etc) and I wouldn't say he was a guy in top condition. That said, I believe he had an above average talent level(even over the normal top 8 type of guy).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Side note, I am curious how a kid can spend 5 or 6 years in college with a general studies major. What do you do with a general studies degree and how could it take 5 or 6 years?

 

One of the Navy kids is a General Studies major. Disappointed it wasn't Admiral Studies.

Maybe he's Marine Option (10% of each Middie class enters the Marine Corps as 2nd Lieutenants).

 

The USNA has produced more Commandants of the Marine Corps than any other college.

 

General Studies may be perfect for him!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm not taking sides but I will say that there are those that are extremely talented and are able to be very successful without being the hardest worker in the roomor even having great workout partners. How do you explain the success of a Darrion Caldwell? He had no workout partners(compared with Iowa, Psu, etc) and I wouldn't say he was a guy in top condition. That said, I believe he had an above average talent level(even over the normal top 8 type of guy).

 

One thing I pointed out is there are outliers. On the other hand, Caldwell was nowhere near as dominant as Ruth (although it's difficult to account for how much his injuries impacted that). How much better might Caldwell have been coming out of, say, today's PSU room? That's precisely the point being made.

 

One edge I would say Caldwell had over his competition was that he was not intimidated by Metcalf. And that went a long way in that weight class at that time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank goodness your a "hard worker" because if you had to rely on your brains, you'd be s.o.l.

 

I have a Masters degree and get paid to work out. You drive a taxi in Iowa. Any more zingers champ?

I work for a major company where I am the only person in the entire state who does what I do. The fact that I drove cab for a while shows that I have dealt with and made it through some hardships . Something you know nothing about.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Darrion Caldwell had Tony Davis as a training partner. He dominated everybody as a junior, including our Olympian Doug Schwab... Ed Ruth has obviously benefitted from the PSU room, but his work ethic is equal to that of Kyle Dake. Dake is an athletic freak, but he also got lucky. Ed Ruth blew out his knee his Freshman year. If not, he might be a 4Xer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Since this has been hijacked, I will say that I know firsthand that despite Bubba J's success, he was the least hardest worker in the Penn State Room.

 

I would be willing to bet that he was nowhere near the least hard worker in the ASU room, though.

 

ZING

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Wow Johnny you seem really pissed about people questioning you posts? Some of them make very good points too. Step away and take a few breaths no need to wish someone ill or call them names.

 

The only thing I'm ticked off about is someone who generalizes things, when they're circumstantial. Lazy people sometimes succeed and extremely hard working people sometimes fail. That's not my opinion, that is how it happens sometimes. For someone to argue that and point a finger in an extremely hard working person's face who came up short of their goals after giving it everything they had to give to succeed and say, "You didnt' work hard enough" is sickening. I'm not the only person on this board who was in a wrestling room full of lazy guys that succeeded and hard working guys that came up short.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Wow Johnny you seem really pissed about people questioning you posts? Some of them make very good points too. Step away and take a few breaths no need to wish someone ill or call them names.

 

The only thing I'm ticked off about is someone who generalizes things, when they're circumstantial. Lazy people sometimes succeed and extremely hard working people sometimes fail. That's not my opinion, that is how it happens sometimes. For someone to argue that and point a finger in an extremely hard working person's face who came up short of their goals after giving it everything they had to give to succeed and say, "You didnt' work hard enough" is sickening. I'm not the only person on this board who was in a wrestling room full of lazy guys that succeeded and hard working guys that came up short.

 

Not in a DI room you didn't. And THAT is the point you CONTINUE to miss....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Wow Johnny you seem really pissed about people questioning you posts? Some of them make very good points too. Step away and take a few breaths no need to wish someone ill or call them names.

 

The only thing I'm ticked off about is someone who generalizes things, when they're circumstantial. Lazy people sometimes succeed and extremely hard working people sometimes fail. That's not my opinion, that is how it happens sometimes. For someone to argue that and point a finger in an extremely hard working person's face who came up short of their goals after giving it everything they had to give to succeed and say, "You didnt' work hard enough" is sickening. I'm not the only person on this board who was in a wrestling room full of lazy guys that succeeded and hard working guys that came up short.

 

Not in a DI room you didn't. And THAT is the point you CONTINUE to miss....

 

You can't conclude that the NCAA champion at each weight won strictly because he worked harder than the other wrestlers in his weight class. There are a TON of other factors that go into why a person wins or doesn't win an NCAA title. It doesn't ALL boil down to who worked harder than who. Hard work often has A LOT to do with it, but it is not everythingThat is the point I'm making. Where you are drawn in the tournament, upsets of other wrestlers, luck, talent...go on and on and on. There are a lot of reasons why a person wins an NCAA title, and to blatantly ignore all of those reasons and sum it up as, "Worked harder than everyone else" is ignorant.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's an exclusive club 99% of hardworking asses will never get a chance at. The counter debate was of those 1%ers, some are in the .1% subset programs and their environment doesn't give them any wiggle room to slack off.

 

Did I get that right?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[

You can't conclude that the NCAA champion at each weight won strictly because he worked harder than the other wrestlers in his weight class. There are a TON of other factors that go into why a person wins or doesn't win an NCAA title. It doesn't ALL boil down to who worked harder than who. Hard work often has A LOT to do with it, but it is not everythingThat is the point I'm making. Where you are drawn in the tournament, upsets of other wrestlers, luck, talent...go on and on and on. There are a lot of reasons why a person wins an NCAA title, and to blatantly ignore all of those reasons and sum it up as, "Worked harder than everyone else" is ignorant.

 

First off, I NEVER said anything of that sort. I simply said talent IS NOT enough. You can have a decent career with some good wins but you have to EMBRACE the outline that is provided to be truly successful.

 

I think you are only seeing part of the argument. Twisting it into something personal and blindly attacking. I don't think ANYONE believes that each AA finish is based SOLELY on a ladder of who worked harder.

 

My argument was that the BEST OF THE BEST did not get there SOLELY on talent. You then attacked that argument by basically saying Ruth did. You did that with NO firsthand knowledge, and truly no knowledge of the inner working of a DI program.

 

There are some outliers who may have sneaked in a high finish on mainly talent but there is NO WAY they did it on a consistent basis. Caldwell and Jenkins are the perfect examples. They had bright moments, which I think were a big result of great preparation. However, they were openly questioned about their career dedication and had some letdowns as a result. They were great but could have managed themselves to be even greater.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It's an exclusive club 99% of hardworking asses will never get a chance at. The counter debate was of those 1%ers, some are in the .1% subset programs and their environment doesn't give them any wiggle room to slack off.

 

Did I get that right?

 

I do not think it means what he thinks it means...........

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...