whaletail

As much as I didn't like the way Cael handled Suriano's injury at NCAAs, I can't come up with a valid opposing argument. If it were high school, it'd likely be a different story, but as a college coach, I just don't see how he owes a duty of care to anyone beyond the university and those on his team. Seems un-Christian, and certainly not in line with Jesus' teachings, but given how little he publicly proselytizes, I'm not even comfortable calling the guy a hypocrite.

I can't recall a single issue since probably his second year at Iowa. I'm not a Hawkeye fan, or Brands fan, but he really appears to have thrived there.

By my admittedly quick count, 7/10 Minnesota wrestlers equaled or exceeded their seed in 2001. Wonder how that compares against recent PSU teams.

I'm pretty sure Minnesota won the 2000 NCAAs with 10 AAs, but no champs. As for 2024 PSU, 10 AAs wouldn't shock me at all, but I'd guess 8. Not sure who I'd leave out though. Interestingly, Davis probably has one of the tougher paths to AA, and he's a 1 seed.

Reminds me of Quentin Wright. Still my favorite PSU big guy.

I doubt it, especially since these are Intermat forums, but I don't know. I think we're probably just a vocal minority, reacting to what seems like a growing phenomenon within the sport.

He gave Robles his toughest match of the tourney that year, and may have even managed to get away from bottom.

Ben's leaving? Any explanation? As annoying as he could be, he anchored the show really well. His thoughts on coaching were genius, and his general curiosity was infectious. Given the above, certain aspects of his ideology were both inexplicable and maddening, but FRL may really flounder without him (and especially without Willie to play a similar role).

TBF, Cael kept up the Suriano charade for so long, they couldn't even re-seed 125 lbs at NCAAs, or swap in an alternate to take Suriano's place. Blew up the bottom half of the bracket, arguably created an "uneven playing field", and for about as ephemeral a potential gain as I can conceive. Not that it's his job to look out for anyone beyond his own athletes. He's there to win. But please stop with the 'glory to god' babble, and anything to do with jesus. According to your own holy book(s), the latter was as uninterested in winning (let alone at all costs) as he was in any of the other nonsense done in his name today.

I'd need to read those arguments before rebutting them, but for clarity's sake, I doubt whether piety or secularism (or atheism if you insist) has ever been the primary impetus for violence. Greed - for power, money and sex etc., as well as fear and shame are probably always at the center of such tragedies, and ignorance probably explains the rest. Even horrors typically attributed to religion - the Inquisition among them, surely arose directly from greed, lust, fear and misogyny - not religious faith. But faith can be an unbelievably powerful weapon (even unintentionally), and as far as I can imagine, in ways that secularism/atheism cannot. TL;DR Faith isn't the cause, it's the sword. Secularism/atheism isn't a cause, nor much of a sword. Maybe it'll be considered a pen eventually, but these metaphors are quickly becoming an unwieldy mess.

Many of your examples are probably apt, but Real Woods has looked off all year, and even when winning. Far fewer takedowns, back points, and none of last year's swagger. That said, I thought the same of Levi Haines, right up until he blanked Franek.

Apologies for the laughing comment. It was unnecessarily obnoxious.

BTW, where did I ever claim the Dobbs decision banned abortion? I stated that it directly led to the state laws at issue, which is absolutely accurate. Please stop putting words in mouth (or attributing arguments to me which are not mine).

As haphazard and hard to follow as your response is - 1. The belief that women should be allowed to make their own decisions regarding their own bodies is NOT ME IMPOSING MY WILL, but simply recognizing that they should receive the same rights the rest of us enjoy. 2. Essentially isn't used disingenuously, but rather to acknowledge that there are some exceptions to save the life of the mother. Since that doesn't confer much of a right (not to die), abortion is essentially banned in those states that have acted post Dobbs. Such exceptions are also purposefully worded so vaguely that hospitals don't know what will or won't be considered legal. Therefore, doctors can't use their own best judgment when deciding how and when to medically intervene. As a result, women have already nearly died as a result of these draconian laws. SOME STATES DON'T PROVIDE AN EXCEPTION FOR RAPE VICTIMS. 3. They are absolutely against public sentiment. Most Americans favor some limits on abortion, obviously, but in Kansas' recent public referendum, for example, the proposed law was struck down 59-41. Similar results in Wisconsin, and both are red states and should reflect higher than average anti-abortion sentiment. I'm not anecdotally citing LA/NYC opinion polls, and please don't put words in my mouth. I'll address your remaining "arguments" when I have some time (and can stop laughing at you the KC_Godfather).

I think you're confusing causation with association. There's a reason credible historians don't cite secularity as a cause of those deaths (and it's naught to do with left wing academia).