2 Things

[hawkaeg80]

#1 From what I understand both PSU and Ohio State will be at Carver next year. Sorry if I am a little slow on this, but I haven't seen any threads.
#2 Where do you think the Hawks will be ranked at the beginning of next season (individual and team)?

 

[Spicolli]

125 Gilman #1
133 Clark #1
141 UR
149 Sorenson #2
157 Kemerer #15
165 UR
174 Meyer #7
184 Brooks #7
197 UR
HWT Stoll #9

 

[smalls103]

Looks good, Spicolli.

I was gonna respond with exactly #15 for Kemerer. (though i think he'll prove to be better than that)

 

[NYWRESTLER94]

I hope Kemerer is at 49 and Sorenson goes up he didn't look that big when I saw him in MSG and he brings a lot more to the table then Sorenson. I also believe Ironside had an interview where he said Sorenson was strong enough to go 157

 

[Chopper25]

I hope Kemerer is at 49 and Sorenson goes up he didn't look that big when I saw him in MSG and he brings a lot more to the table then Sorenson. I also believe Ironside had an interview where he said Sorenson was strong enough to go 157

I hope one cuts to 141.

 

[minnhawkeye]

Well if that is true compared to our home meets last year should have some full houses.
That is good news.

 

[Lionfan44]

I thought Iowa had agreed to travel to Penn State when Cael and Tom set up the match at CHA last year.

 

[minnhawkeye]

As far as I know Cal and Tom don't make the schedule big ten does and don't think Cal has earned that much power Yet. Also that was 2 years ago but maybe u just became a fan of wrestling.

 

[LutherAce]

The Cael/Tom non-conference Dual meet was in Carver because Iowa went to PSU 2x in a row, and PSU came to Carver 3yrs ago and got beat. Then the following year when they weren't on the schedule, Tom called out Cael and said "Something is Missing on the Schedule" Cael replied "let's make it happen" Tom then said something like "You owe us one" so Cael agreed to come out again. Has nothing to do with what the Big 10 Schedule will be for next year.

 

[Lionfan44]

Wow! Okay. I guess I learned not to ask a question. And, btw, not new to wrestling. Am 71 and started wrestling in 6th grade and did 4 years of D lll Back to lurking.

 

[vanhawkman]

I hope Kemerer is at 49 and Sorenson goes up he didn't look that big when I saw him in MSG and he brings a lot more to the table then Sorenson. I also believe Ironside had an interview where he said Sorenson was strong enough to go 157

Ironside did say that, but I've also heard that Kemmerer was cutting quite a bit to make 49, wrestled 152 prior to coming to IC, I'm guessing he goes up...

 

[minnhawkeye]

Wow! Okay. I guess I learned not to ask a question. And, btw, not new to wrestling. Am 71 Gstarted wrestling in 6th grade and did 4 years of D lll Back to lurking.

G
Ok sorry saw u just joined in 2014 and we have lots of Penn State trolls come over here and see u only had 8 post in 2 years. Guess I thought you could have asked same question on your own board. Have a nice evening .

 

[Lionfan44]

G
Ok sorry saw u just joined in 2014 and we have lots of Penn State trolls come over here and see u only had 8 post in 2 years. Guess I thought you could have asked same question on your own board. Have a nice evening .

Actually, I have been coming to your board since 2011. I consider it to be one of the best wrestling boards available. And, I have tremendous respect for Iowa and its wrestling tradition. I have also seen, unfortunately, some of the PSU fans who come to your board and have been, shall we say, less than gracious. So, I can understand if some of your board members are a bit suspicious when some of the PSU people post.

I only brought up the question of where the next Iowa – PSU meet would be because it was discussed in this thread. So, it seemed like the logical place to get clarification. I understand that the Big Ten is in charge of scheduling. But, I continue to be naïve in the belief that the Big Ten would actually accept some input from its members. You would think that by now I would have figured out that this is just not the case.

 

[MVPFAN]

I hope one cuts to 141.

I hope you are being sarcastic.

 

[jvclark]

I hope you are being sarcastic.

I agree. That cut would require a limb to get cut off to get down to 41.

Wrestle up and be stronger, which is an advantage we all know we could use

 

[minnhawkeye]

Actually, I have been coming to your board since 2011. I consider it to be one of the best wrestling boards available. And, I have tremendous respect for Iowa and its wrestling tradition. I have also seen, unfortunately, some of the PSU fans who come to your board and have been, shall we say, less than gracious. So, I can understand if some of your board members are a bit suspicious when some of the PSU people post.

I only brought up the question of where the next Iowa – PSU meet would be because it was discussed in this thread. So, it seemed like the logical place to get clarification. I understand that the Big Ten is in charge of scheduling. But, I continue to be naïve in the belief that the Big Ten would actually accept some input from its members. You would think that by now I would have figured out that this is just not the case.

Told u was sorry I accused u of trolling. All is well here Peace be with you.

 

[rossel 33]

I agree. That cut would require a limb to get cut off to get down to 41.

Wrestle up and be stronger, which is an advantage we all know we could use

------

It could be done (see the 30 pg Grothus thread).

Just kidding.... would like to see one of them at 157, and hopefully Turk or some steps up at 141.

 

[texas twister]

Ironside did say that, but I've also heard that Kemmerer was cutting quite a bit to make 49, wrestled 152 prior to coming to IC, I'm guessing he goes up...

My money on Kem going up and getting much stronger.

 

[Lionfan44]

Told u was sorry I accused u of trolling. All is well here Peace be with you.

And I do appreciate that. I look forward to future chats of a good spirited and positive nature.

 

[BIG10MANIAC]

125 Gilman #1
133 Clark #1
141 UR
149 Sorenson #2
157 Kemerer #15
165 UR
174 Meyer #7
184 Brooks #7
197 UR
HWT Stoll #9

DANG - Too many holes to battle for a title in my opinion. That's a good enough lineup for solid run but we gotta be stacked at all weights to compete with Penn State. Hopefully we get some kids ranked at 141, 165, and 197 by mid year...

 

[The Vak]

I continue to be angry that Nathan Burak wasn't redshirted.

 

[edquinn06]

I continue to be angry that Nathan Burak wasn't redshirted.

Might have happened if Klapprodt wasent injured.

 

[Chopper25]

Might have happened if Klapprodt wasent injured.

Does anyone know if Klapprodt is eligible for a medical redshirt?

 

[Chopper25]

I hope you are being sarcastic.

Imar, Nolf > Heil, Merdith. Was Kemerer a big 149 lber? I don't know. Whoever will be fine at 157, but I'd rather take my chances at 141 if it was possible.

 

[smalls103]

That's fine and all, Chopper. But either one would have to be a corpse to make it.

 

[SPOONER]

Imar, Nolf > Heil, Merdith. Was Kemerer a big 149 lber? I don't know. Whoever will be fine at 157, but I'd rather take my chances at 141 if it was possible.

Yes he was. As is Sorensen. They aren't cutting to 141.

 

[Mendoza77]

DANG - Too many holes to battle for a title in my opinion. That's a good enough lineup for solid run but we gotta be stacked at all weights to compete with Penn State. Hopefully we get some kids ranked at 141, 165, and 197 by mid year...

I'm going to campaign (a la Trump) to become THE moderator here, I will rule with an iron fist, and my first executive action will be to ban/forbid the word "hole" when talking about lineups. Of course, there will be punishment for those who try to sneak the word in, though I've yet to consult my panel of advisors regarding the punishment (all are welcome to apply to be one of my advisors).

My reasoning is two-fold. First, no one has defined what is meant by "hole" in the lineup - is it a weight where the wrestler is unranked, or has little chance to AA, or is low AA, or is not dominant and fails to score bonus pts. in almost every match?? Second, EVERY team has "holes" (in the sense that I'm assuming many of you are using the term). Would PSU's "holes" this past year be at 141, 165, 184, and 285? 133 (Conaway) scored only 6.5 pts. at NCAAs - would that be considered a hole? PSU won the title with their 5 finalists (109.5 pts.) - they didn't need any more. To me, this clearly shows that to win a team title, you need 4-5 studs --- the rest can be "holes." (man I hate that word - infers that the guy at that weight is inconsequential, when in face everyone on the team is important to the team's success!)

 

[Azchief32]

Kemerer weighs more on full feed than Sorensen. He could make 149 and be fine because he is incredibly disciplined from what I hear but out of the two, he would more likely be the 57.

 

[april racer]

That's fine and all, Chopper. But either one would have to be a corpse to make it.

If Willie is against the pull it must be impossible!!

 

[jvclark]

I'm going to campaign (a la Trump) to become THE moderator here, I will rule with an iron fist, and my first executive action will be to ban/forbid the word "hole" when talking about lineups. Of course, there will be punishment for those who try to sneak the word in, though I've yet to consult my panel of advisors regarding the punishment (all are welcome to apply to be one of my advisors).

My reasoning is two-fold. First, no one has defined what is meant by "hole" in the lineup - is it a weight where the wrestler is unranked, or has little chance to AA, or is low AA, or is not dominant and fails to score bonus pts. in almost every match?? Second, EVERY team has "holes" (in the sense that I'm assuming many of you are using the term). Would PSU's "holes" this past year be at 141, 165, 184, and 285? 133 (Conaway) scored only 6.5 pts. at NCAAs - would that be considered a hole? PSU won the title with their 5 finalists (109.5 pts.) - they didn't need any more. To me, this clearly shows that to win a team title, you need 4-5 studs --- the rest can be "holes." (man I hate that word - infers that the guy at that weight is inconsequential, when in face everyone on the team is important to the team's success!)

Hey Mendoza. I like the way you are thinking and I agree. The problem is that PSU already has three studs granted they lose mcintosh and Megaludis, but they have three coming back. We have three finalists as well, but then the questions are which team will be more apt to find those other 2 "studs" you are talking about or which team will have the least amount of "holes"?

I am not sure we know the answer to those questions just yet, and may not know til mid fall when we see where weights are at. As someone mentioned earlier, it would be awful nice having Burak coming off redshirt(especially with Mcintosh gone), but that ship has sailed.

 

[McK_Hawk]

My definition of a hole is a weight where you do not score points at the NCAA tournament as that team title is the ultimate goal every year. Note, the wrestler may be a very good wrestler, but the weight is a hole if no points are being contributed.

 

[pablow]

Five Penn State wrestlers - Nevills, McCutchen, Morelli, Gulibon, and Conaway scored a combined 13 points. Take away Conaway and it's four wrestlers scoring 4 points. It's the donut and not the hole that wins championships.

 

[matter7172]

You could look at it conversely. If you have holes, you'd better have a lot of guys making the finals. As Penn State fans, we're still waiting for a year when all 10 guys do well at Nationals. Personally, I thought there was a shot this year. But 165 never really got sorted out and Nevills, McCutcheon and Gulibon were all affected (like Stoll), to varying degrees, by injuries, so Mendoza is spot on with his analysis. Here's hoping for next year.

 

[pablow]

You could look at it conversely. If you have holes, you'd better have a lot of guys making the finals. As Penn State fans, we're still waiting for a year when all 10 guys do well at Nationals. Personally, I thought there was a shot this year. But 165 never really got sorted out and Nevills, McCutcheon and Gulibon were all affected (like Stoll), to varying degrees, by injuries, so Mendoza is spot on with his analysis. Here's hoping for next year.

Right - and most of our wrestlers either had the flu, were injured or not "sorted out."

 

[minnhawkeye]

I'm going to campaign (a la Trump) to become THE moderator here, I will rule with an iron fist, and my first executive action will be to ban/forbid the word "hole" when talking about lineups. Of course, there will be punishment for those who try to sneak the word in, though I've yet to consult my panel of advisors regarding the punishment (all are welcome to apply to be one of my advisors).

My reasoning is two-fold. First, no one has defined what is meant by "hole" in the lineup - is it a weight where the wrestler is unranked, or has little chance to AA, or is low AA, or is not dominant and fails to score bonus pts. in almost every match?? Second, EVERY team has "holes" (in the sense that I'm assuming many of you are using the term). Would PSU's "holes" this past year be at 141, 165, 184, and 285? 133 (Conaway) scored only 6.5 pts. at NCAAs - would that be considered a hole? PSU won the title with their 5 finalists (109.5 pts.) - they didn't need any more. To me, this clearly shows that to win a team title, you need 4-5 studs --- the rest can be "holes." (man I hate that word - infers that the guy at that weight is inconsequential, when in face everyone on the team is important to the team's success!)

Just another reason why I wish that some way some how could come up with a system for national duals. I love the NCAA tournament don't want to change that however: does it seem fair that a team can have 4=5 studs and be the best team?
In my lifetime I have seen many teams that are a better dual team because of being so well balanced.
They can beat a team with the 4-5 studs by not giving up bonus points to all of them and getting some themselves from the weak ones on the stud team........just saying

 

[HawkTitan]

Five Penn State wrestlers - Nevills, McCutchen, Morelli, Gulibon, and Conaway scored a combined 13 points. Take away Conaway and it's four wrestlers scoring 4 points. It's the donut and not the hole that wins championships.

And, of course, we all know a donut without a hole is a danish. Thus, Iowa needs to become a danish.

 

[UndercoverHawk]

And, of course, we all know a donut without a hole is a danish. Thus, Iowa needs to become a danish.

And the best kind of donut is a cake donut. And spencer lee will be the icing on the cake.

 

[nitlion6]

Just another reason why I wish that some way some how could come up with a system for national duals. I love the NCAA tournament don't want to change that however: does it seem fair that a team can have 4=5 studs and be the best team?
In my lifetime I have seen many teams that are a better dual team because of being so well balanced.
They can beat a team with the 4-5 studs by not giving up bonus points to all of them and getting some themselves from the weak ones on the stud team........just saying

Since the idea of the NCAA team championship in wrestling is to identify and crown the best team the champion - any examples of the obvious best team not winning the championship?

I understand there is a possibility that a 5 stud team could win the title and Penn State could have won with just those 5 this year. But I don't believe anybody is arguing that Penn State wasn't the best team.

I am not aware of any examples going back to at least the early 80s where a team everybody acknowledged was obviously the absolute best team had finished second or lower.

It seems to me the current model does a pretty good job identifying a very deserving champion. Either there is obvious seperation between first and second (this year) or the margin of victory is narrow between a couple teams and the victor is the team which wrestled the better tournament (2014 Minnesota and PSU).

 

[Mr Roarke]

Just another reason why I wish that some way some how could come up with a system for national duals. I love the NCAA tournament don't want to change that however: does it seem fair that a team can have 4=5 studs and be the best team?
In my lifetime I have seen many teams that are a better dual team because of being so well balanced.
They can beat a team with the 4-5 studs by not giving up bonus points to all of them and getting some themselves from the weak ones on the stud team........just saying

JRob is that you?

 

[Pennstate1985]

I find the word "hole" disrespectful of the wrestler manning the weight. He may not be a stud, and he may not be a high AA at any point in his career, but he is giving of himself every day for four or five years on the mat, in the weight room, and in the dining hall to compete for our respective schools. That means much more to me than whether they earned 2 points or 20 points at nationals. They each represent us.

Yesterday, PSU lost Garrett Hammond to Drexel. He started a few matches for us a couple years ago, but couldn't beat out teammates more recently. I recall some of our posters calling him a hole in the lineup at the time. I cringed every time reading that. Come to find out that Garrett is graduating this summer in only 3 years!!, and will spend his last two years of eligibility at Drexel as a grad student. So while some saw him as hole in the lineup, the young man is certainly not a hole in the game of life, and we should all remember that.