All Dake Fans

[Guest Hammerlock3]

i don't think moving up weights is important at all

[The_Education 24]

Agreed, Cletus. There is a difference between best career and best wrestler.

 

Burroughs was one of the best college wrestlers of the last few decades. He's up there with Kemp and Smith.

 

Dake could have one of the three best careers in the era of four-year eligibility.

 

And win or lose this March, Dake will be one of the best wrestlers of the decade, and will have one of the best careers of the decade.

[tommygun 52]

Of any decade!

[rodneydeeeee 0]

Ok, so let me ask this in a different way.

 

I won't call any names, but regardless whether you think Taylor/Dake won tonight, it's obvious to EVERYONE they are as even as we have ever seen. Match 1 - OT Rideout (2-1). Match 2 - Controversy with Dake winning during the last seconds 3-2. Many feel Taylor won, but whatever.

 

If Dake is top 3 ALL TIME, and even in the same breath as Cael, where the heck is DT? I'd imagine he can't be THAT far behind Dake, RIGHT?

 

Let's hear this.

[scribe 1,835]

The margin of error at the top is very narrow. DT is a top 20 wrestler of all time I think, but he needs to win more than 2 individual titles to be considered any more than that.

[two-six 1]

Ok, so let me ask this in a different way.

 

I won't call any names, but regardless whether you think Taylor/Dake won tonight, it's obvious to EVERYONE they are as even as we have ever seen. Match 1 - OT Rideout (2-1). Match 2 - Controversy with Dake winning during the last seconds 3-2. Many feel Taylor won, but whatever.

 

If Dake is top 3 ALL TIME, and even in the same breath as Cael, where the heck is DT? I'd imagine he can't be THAT far behind Dake, RIGHT?

 

Let's hear this.

 

I actually was hinting something similar earlier but not stretching it as far as Cael Sanderson. More like those that said Taylor and Dake were not in the same league as Burroughs/Howe. Seems they matched up against Caldwell about the same.

 

The margin is so small at the top, you must have less than 3 losses to be in that club.

[headshuck 2,604]

The margin of error at the top is very narrow. DT is a top 20 wrestler of all time I think, but he needs to win more than 2 individual titles to be considered any more than that.

 

 

He'll be in a grouping including guys like Steve Mocco. 4-time finalist, 2-time champ. But right now he has 1. Little early isn't it?

[Guest Hammerlock3]

he went to the olympic team trials after his sophmore year and got thrashed twice.

 

He is no where near top twenty status.

[Alwayswrestling 227]

The thing is what Dake has done is incredible three titles at three weights with out a RS now on track to win 4 at 4 different weights just insane. Think about as good as Kenny Monday and Dave Schultz were and they only won one NCAA title and never went undefeated in a season or that John Smith only went undefeated in one season in winning two NCAA titles. Coming close to beating Dake for DT is not enough to put him with the best of the best all time he has to beat him come NCAA time.

[Guest Hammerlock3]

great post Alwayswrestling! (whom I normally malign)

[rodneydeeeee 0]

The thing is what Dake has done is incredible three titles at three weights with out a RS now on track to win 4 at 4 different weights just insane. Think about as good as Kenny Monday and Dave Schultz were and they only won one NCAA title and never went undefeated in a season or that John Smith only went undefeated in one season in winning two NCAA titles. Coming close to beating Dake for DT is not enough to put him with the best of the best all time he has to beat him come NCAA time.

 

Which is why I ask.

 

So Dake is top 3, but Taylor is NO WHERE NEAR TOP 20, when the first match with Dake went into an OT rideout, and 2nd match went to whoever you felt won. How is the margin that different?

 

I'm just asking. It doesn't make a ton of sense. Usually the difference between the 2nd best and 100th best is DECISIVE.

[MSU158 2,009]

The thing is what Dake has done is incredible three titles at three weights with out a RS now on track to win 4 at 4 different weights just insane. Think about as good as Kenny Monday and Dave Schultz were and they only won one NCAA title and never went undefeated in a season or that John Smith only went undefeated in one season in winning two NCAA titles. Coming close to beating Dake for DT is not enough to put him with the best of the best all time he has to beat him come NCAA time.

 

Which is why I ask.

 

So Dake is top 3, but Taylor is NO WHERE NEAR TOP 20, when the first match with Dake went into an OT rideout, and 2nd match went to whoever you felt won. How is the margin that different?

 

I'm just asking. It doesn't make a ton of sense. Usually the difference between the 2nd best and 100th best is DECISIVE.

 

 

I am by no means a Taylor fan, but come on everyone drop the bias. Taylor is currently one of the most dominating wrestlers ANYONE has ever seen. He lost once as a freshman to an amazing talent with a HUGE chip on his shoulder. Without that motivation Taylor's first official collegiate loss would be a VERY close match to a 3 time NCAA champ. He is ABSOLUTELY a top 20 wrestler of ALL TIME. If he loses to Dake again, wrestling him very close, He would be a 3 time finalist with 1 championship with 1 year remaining. If he doesn't have Howe in his weightclass next year, barring an injury he would undoubtedly finish with 3 losses(losing to Dake in this years finals) as a 4 time finalist and 2x champ. That puts him top 10 in my book. The kid is REALLY good. WE just have been super lucky to see some amazing talent the last few years.

[Dr_Gonzo 1]

Big IF, but if he goes 2,1,2,1 then to me he's Ben Askren and Jake Varner. Certainly no shame in that, but no better and no worse. Just my opinion and how I would view the Great DT career.

[rodneydeeeee 0]

Big IF, but if he goes 2,1,2,1 then to me he's Ben Askren and Jake Varner. Certainly no shame in that, but no better and no worse. Just my opinion and how I would view the Great DT career.

 

That's OK to put him with them, but I still don't understand how some can claim Dake top 3, even #1, but Taylor being no where near top 20.

 

Gonzo; are these 2 about as even as you have ever seen in folkstyle? Honestly...

[LImartin 5]

hmmmm ????

 

Without his "ankle pick" - and without the ability to "crab" - Not sure what you see to determine him as really good. Maybe, in this Market- and this Time yet, I find it hard to think that there hasnt been better than both Taylor and Dake....in neutral/ on the mat. Quality Competition has been limited- Let's not forget that neither has earned an International medal....and that speaks volumes.

[Perry 1,428]

If Dake wins the NCAA's for the fourth time this year it would put him in the top 3 overall collegiate performances in history, 2nd to Cael's 4 undefeated seasons and probably tying with Smith.

 

However, if we're talking about THE BEST wrestlers ever, I don't think I would have him in the top 3. I think Burroughs as a Senior would beat Dake as he is now, but Dake's 4 championships at 4 different weight classes without a red shirt year outshine Burrough's overall college career.

 

These are two different items in my mind at least.

[Dr_Gonzo 1]

Rodney-I'll try to make my view easy to understand. Career and best are two different things. People can twist and turn both in conversation to fit whatever they want. For example, if Dake pulls this off he is a no doubter top 3 all time, there is just no arguing that. 4 titles 4 different weights with no red shirt is the craziest thing ever. May never be repeated. But is he better his senior year than Jordan Burroughs was his senior year? No. He's simply not one of the three best wrestlers I've ever seen. David Taylor isn't even close. Ed Ruth on the other hand, I believe, is something special.

In answer to your last question-yea as far as two studs repeatedly wrestling each other they're about as close as it gets. They're probably tied with about 15 other solid stud rivalries but yes they are VERY close to each other on the mat. Career wise it's yet to be seen, but Dake could end up FAR ahead. Taylor will ultimately have a say in that and that makes this all the more dramatic. This is a treat, we'll look back on this season and talk about it for a long time.

[rodneydeeeee 0]

Rodney-I'll try to make my view easy to understand. Career and best are two different things. People can twist and turn both in conversation to fit whatever they want. For example, if Dake pulls this off he is a no doubter top 3 all time, there is just no arguing that. 4 titles 4 different weights with no red shirt is the craziest thing ever. May never be repeated. But is he better his senior year than Jordan Burroughs was his senior year? No. He's simply not one of the three best wrestlers I've ever seen. David Taylor isn't even close. Ed Ruth on the other hand, I believe, is something special.

In answer to your last question-yea as far as two studs repeatedly wrestling each other they're about as close as it gets. They're probably tied with about 15 other solid stud rivalries but yes they are VERY close to each other on the mat. Career wise it's yet to be seen, but Dake could end up FAR ahead. Taylor will ultimately have a say in that and that makes this all the more dramatic. This is a treat, we'll look back on this season and talk about it for a long time.

 

Fair enough. As as the poster before you said, best career and best wrestler obviously are different.

[dsnc471 25]

I suppose the goal here would be to rank guys based on college accomplishments alone, but that's impossible because it's impossible to ignore what guys did after college. If Burroughs had retired after winning his 2nd NCAA title, he would be considered great, but not one of the best ever. But we know he became best in the World two consecutive years after graduating. And he's much better than Dake. But his college career was not as impressive. Taylor is obviously very close to Dake right now in wrestling ability, but his college accomplishments are not as impressive. If Taylor wins NCAA this year and next year, then he'll be a 3x champ, having beaten Dake in the NCAA finals, and we could legitimately call him a top 20 college career guy then. If he loses to Dake this year and finishes 2-1-2-1, he would still have a lot of stiff competition among college careers. Askren, Herbert, Mark Perry finished with similar credentials, and that's just in the last 6 years or so. Dake is in the discussion for an elite group because he is already 1-1-1-?, but Taylor at 2-1-?-? has too much work left to be done at this point. Remember that Dustin Schlatter was in discussion for being an all timer after his freshman year, but he finished up 1-3-7-DNP. Taylor is already on track to far surpass those numbers, but there's still a lot of matches left to wrestle.

[rodneydeeeee 0]

I suppose the goal here would be to rank guys based on college accomplishments alone, but that's impossible because it's impossible to ignore what guys did after college. If Burroughs had retired after winning his 2nd NCAA title, he would be considered great, but not one of the best ever. But we know he became best in the World two consecutive years after graduating. And he's much better than Dake. But his college career was not as impressive. Taylor is obviously very close to Dake right now in wrestling ability, but his college accomplishments are not as impressive. If Taylor wins NCAA this year and next year, then he'll be a 3x champ, having beaten Dake in the NCAA finals, and we could legitimately call him a top 20 college career guy then. If he loses to Dake this year and finishes 2-1-2-1, he would still have a lot of stiff competition among college careers. Askren, Herbert, Mark Perry finished with similar credentials, and that's just in the last 6 years or so. Dake is in the discussion for an elite group because he is already 1-1-1-?, but Taylor at 2-1-?-? has too much work left to be done at this point. Remember that Dustin Schlatter was in discussion for being an all timer after his freshman year, but he finished up 1-3-7-DNP. Taylor is already on track to far surpass those numbers, but there's still a lot of matches left to wrestle.

 

I don't disagree with any of that. All I am basically implying is that, wrestler for wrestler, they are as even as it gets. Career wise could either be better for Dake, or even for both if Taylor wins this year and next. Even if Dake wins this year however, wrestler for wrestler, not career for career, the difference is minimal, not #2 vs #102. I agree that J Burroughs would have beaten both of these guys in his senior year.

[Guest Hammerlock3]

Again, are you trying to look like you know nothing?

 

Some know how to win, others really really know how to win. Dake beat Reece Humphrees, Montell Marion, Frank Molinaro x2, and David Taylor x3. Taylor knows nothing about these type of wins and froze up in a cradle he had time to break in NCAA finals.

[PA-Fan 0]

Again, are you trying to look like you know nothing?

 

Some know how to win, others really really know how to win. Dake beat Reece Humphrees, Montell Marion, Frank Molinaro x2, and David Taylor x3. Taylor knows nothing about these type of wins and froze up in a cradle he had time to break in NCAA finals.

 

What an idiotic and ignorant post. You are talking about a kid who has sought out the best competition - and had "these type of wins" - his entire career. The fact that he lost to two (only two, both NCAA champions and one will be considered one of the best EVER) wrestlers in his college career does not knock him down a peg and show that he can not get "these type of wins".

 

Sincerely, such an idiotic, ridiculous, ill-mannered, moronic, ignorant, malicious post.

[Perry 1,428]

I have to agree that Dake has handled much better competition than Taylor has (not a knock against DT). Dake has beaten the best, repeatedly. Taylor is phenomenal, but he hasn't stepped up to big challenges at the NCAA's like Dake has to this point. Come this March this may change if DT comes out on top, which he certainly can. But until he does I think Hammerlock's statement holds ground.

[PA-Fan 0]

I have to agree that Dake has handled much better competition than Taylor has (not a knock against DT). Dake has beaten the best, repeatedly. Taylor is phenomenal, but he hasn't stepped up to big challenges at the NCAA's like Dake has to this point. Come this March this may change if DT comes out on top, which he certainly can. But until he does I think Hammerlock's statement holds ground.

 

No, it doesn't. Because he is not making a comment on the fact that Dake has beaten tougher opponents than Taylor in college, which he has (although not quite as tough as some would like to make it seem, but that is nit picking a bit)...he is deliberately putting down Taylor stating he can not win "these types of matches". Look at the kids career, entire career...that statement is complete and total nonsense.

 

Another fun side note, remember a few weeks ago when Tyler Caldwell was being considered on Taylor/Dake's level (he beat Howe right?)....well Taylor just destroyed him. So does this count, or no? Does Caldwell beating Howe not mean much because Taylor destroyed him (like I actually argued in the first place)...

[Perry 1,428]

I have to agree that Dake has handled much better competition than Taylor has (not a knock against DT). Dake has beaten the best, repeatedly. Taylor is phenomenal, but he hasn't stepped up to big challenges at the NCAA's like Dake has to this point. Come this March this may change if DT comes out on top, which he certainly can. But until he does I think Hammerlock's statement holds ground.

 

No, it doesn't. Because he is not making a comment on the fact that Dake has beaten tougher opponents than Taylor in college, which he has (although not quite as tough as some would like to make it seem, but that is nit picking a bit)...he is deliberately putting down Taylor stating he can not win "these types of matches". Look at the kids career, entire career...that statement is complete and total nonsense.

 

Another fun side note, remember a few weeks ago when Tyler Caldwell was being considered on Taylor/Dake's level (he beat Howe right?)....well Taylor just destroyed him. So does this count, or no? Does Caldwell beating Howe not mean much because Taylor destroyed him (like I actually argued in the first place)...

 

 

I would agree with you that Taylor has the potential, the Caldwell match was an impressive win for sure. My point was not so much that DT couldn't do it, just that he hasn't to date.

 

I will be interested to see DT vs Howe if they end up at the same weight next year, because honestly DT impresses me more than Andrew Howe does. On a side note, wasn't Howe injured when Caldwell beat him in the semi's??