Eagle26

I actually thought about typing pinfall just for you, but I couldn’t get myself to do it lol. Looks like making a tech a little easier will be a step in the right direction

How does this compare to the number of falls per year? My guess is there are a lot more falls than tech falls. IMO, it shouldn’t be easier to get a fall than a tech fall, which is why I like making it easier to get a tech.

Wouldn’t more tech falls be a good thing? If you are looking for a tech fall with takedowns only, you need to get 7 or 8 takedowns while your opponent gets 0. If you can do that, it is total domination and we should get the wrestlers off the mat. No one wants to see that bad of a mismatch for 7 minutes straight.

Well there’s only one way to find out, and unfortunately, I doubt we will get to see it.

This dual could get ugly for Iowa. Honestly, Penn State could win every match - not likely, but possible. 125 (if Howard is healthy), 141, 157, and 165 are toss ups with the first two as slight favorites for Iowa and the last two as slight favorites for PSU. So Iowa’s path to victory is to get Gable, win all 4 toss ups, AND win the bonus point battle. There’s approximately 0% chance of doing all 3 of those. And in regards to the hypothetical AJ vs Brooks match, before Final X, I would’ve said that there’s a chance Brooks could struggle with his size/strength. However, after seeing how well Brooks handled Taylor’s size, I don’t think it will be an issue for him. Plus, I can’t imagine AJ being able to hang with his pace after a huge cut and not wrestling in so long.

Wow! This is hard for me to believe… I was sure I’ve seen it play out the other way, but I can’t think of one off the top of my head. Anyone have any examples of this? I find it odd that UWW has six examples in their rule book but not a single one includes multiple scores worth more than one point. I actually hope I was wrong on this because it is much, much easier to keep track of if you only need to know if the wrestlers score one of each value.

@LJB wouldn’t highest value of holds include all holds? It doesn’t say highest value of a single hold. In other words, if it’s 4-4, and blue scored 2 and 2 and red scored 2, 1, and 1 but scored last, blue wins, right?

It is how the first criteria typically plays out. In the example I was giving, let’s say there’s a 14-13 match, say no one has a 4 pt move, then the coach would have to try to remember who had the most 2 point moves to determine if the wrestler with 13 points needs 1 or 2 to take the lead.

Yeah, but if domestic refs call it differently than international refs, I’d say that alone is inconsistency. There needs to be clarification across the board on how it should be called. And I believe we should be calling it a caution and 1 more often, or maybe even change the rule to make it a step out.

Fair point. It was a bit of hyperbole based on the calls at Final X. There were sooo many times where it was blatant they dropped to their knees to avoid a step out and I can’t remember it being called once this weekend.

Yes, I agree with you guys it’s a totally unacceptable for a coach to not understand criteria. It’s really not hard to understand at all. What I was saying is that it is difficult to keep track of sometimes - such as who has the most 2 point moves in a 14-13 match? Writing down every score on a notepad would solve it, but I think that would be really distracting from your coaching, and I don’t think I’ve ever seen coaches doing that (or maybe just didn’t notice)? They probably do or should have a guy in the stands not far away doing that for them.

NFL is not an apples to apples comparison because no other sport has a multi step criteria to determine who has the lead. They can simply look to the scoreboard to see see score and time. However, after thinking about it more, I have to admit you are right that there are some cases in wrestling where the scoreboard can’t tell you the full situation. The main example is if you are down by one, will you have the lead on criteria if you just score one, or do you need to score two? So the coach would need to keep track of that… tough to do, but I guess they have to.

I disagree. A coach is in the heat of the moment and their job is to coach not keep track of score. As a coach, I can completely understand the criteria but easily lose track of who has more 2 point moves in a 10-10 match because that’s not your focus (nor should it be). The scoring table needs to make it clear that is their job.

If Zane wins a medal, it would make it harder because then they would have to beat Gilman in the challenge tournament and then still have to wrestle off Zane.

Wow! I did not know that. Screwing up for DC United is a huge deal, and honestly can’t believe they didn’t learn from their mistakes. I really did think the issue was that they practically had a monopoly on some of the niche sports and didn’t really care because they weren’t losing many subscribers. Knowing this, maybe I was wrong and it’s just total incompetence?? I just don’t understand how they couldn’t fix it for this long though if they really wanted to?

They’ve got us by the balls. The streaming issues are totally unacceptable especially considering it’s been a common theme for YEARS. However, if you are a fan of international styles, they cover some can’t miss events. The cost of a ticket alone to Final X was about the cost of a yearly Flo subscription. I can’t afford to travel to every event I want to see, so I’m not canceling my subscription. They know that, so they don’t care to invest the money to fix the issues. I’ve often really wanted to cancel out of spite, but I’m just not willing to give up watching those events to “teach them a lesson” (that they might not learn). And so it continues…

First let me say overall I’m a big fan of the freestyle rules (1000x better than ball grab era), but it doesn’t mean we couldn’t make little tweaks to make them better. One thing I noticed that was glaring at Final X was inconsistency on the out of bounds cautions and grounded calls. The thing that blows my mind is that a wrestler can drop to his knees and just slide out of bounds and it is never a caution and 1. How is that not avoiding wrestling or negative wrestling?! You are literally refusing to come to your feet to fight to stay in bounds. Then if someone comes up to their feet and tries to fight to stay in but gives up the step out, they could give up one plus a caution and one. Seems backwards to me. Not sure what the best solution is though? Should we get rid of grounded rule all together and everything is 1? Or just tweak the interpretation of cautions and put an emphasis on more consistency? Any other ideas?

I’m a big Burroughs fan as well and I have to agree to an extent. However, I think he would regret not giving it a try this close to the Olympics. He has to say he at least gave it his all to try to reach his goal. Then I hope he retires with class. I do think he is visibly frustrated and losing confidence though. He was trying so hard to get through Marsteller’s head/hands defense and just couldn’t do it. If he can’t get through Marsteller’s defense, no way he gets through Dake’s. Couple that with the fact that I think he is dreading the cut and it hardly seems worth it to sacrifice another year of total dedication. But, again, I think he needs to try it for his own peace of mind.

I was afraid Burroughs was going to leave his shoes on the mat there. Not sure if they showed it on Flo but he sat in the center of the mat for a while and started untying his shoes. Slay came over and talked him out of it.

Yup same old stuff around here… just the other day there was a poster talking crap about Gilman… can you believe that?!

Imagine if Rulon beat Karelin when he was going for his 4th and beat Lopez going for his 5th! I can’t see it happening but that would be crazy lol. I’m sure no one gave him a chance against Karelin, but I think his physical condition is a lot different now.

I honestly don’t remember all his incidences at ISU, but clearly had a major alcohol problem. I’d find it hard to believe that there wasn’t some kind of sexual misconduct issues that went along with that. Even if there weren’t formal charges, I’m sure Cael had knowledge about all his issues and he still took him. Cael is in a totally different situation now and doesn’t need to take risks to win a national title. Any Ferrari is a risk at this point, so I would believe that Cael wasn’t interested in Angelo even though he doesn’t have the rap sheet of his brothers. However, I can’t stand the attitude of some PSU fans that act like Cael is too good that he would never take someone like that. He’s ultra competitive just like Brands and if he needed to take risks to win a national title he would (and has).

He doesn’t really believe any of his “hot takes”. He is a troll, but a pretty good one and usually good enough that he generates some meaningful discussion.

Just imagine if Penn State fired Cael over the Andrew Long incident I agree I think it’s a bad idea going after the Ferraris, but I’m not sure it’s fair to tie a coaches job to the behavior of college students. There’d be very few coaches left. There’s bad guys on every team… you just don’t hear about them unless they are a high profile athlete

Interesting… I thought I remembered one of his silvers being quite controversial (as in being thrown). It wouldn’t surprise me if it was the case for all of them. I can’t imagine what it’s like for him in Cuba, so I don’t blame him one bit. I’ll be rooting for him for sure in 2024. It would be pretty cool to witness such a historical feat!