I do understand your argument and I’m telling you that you didn’t strengthen your argument with those four gentlemen as your example if you will. Not trying to be difficult, just being real.
2023 World Championships coming up!
- Thread starter Sett1997
- Start date
And to be clear, I don’t blame those guys. Each one of them was good enough to win a title. And each one of them got out-game planned when it counted most. That’s coaching.
IMO, the most important thing that can happen this year is Real Woods winning. Has to show you can win here if you’re not Spencer. You can build from there with the next crop. Once you start putting guys on the top of the podium again, more elite recruits will believe they can win here.
IMO, the most important thing that can happen this year is Real Woods winning. Has to show you can win here if you’re not Spencer. You can build from there with the next crop. Once you start putting guys on the top of the podium again, more elite recruits will believe they can win here.
The only one of those guys that was reasonably expected to win a title as a recruit coming out of HS was Marinelli, and he got smoked by Hall, which tempered some people's expectations for him. A lot of people on this board had higher expectations than other people deemed reasonable. People on this board expect a Top-20-ranked guy to win National titles, and that's not even an AA ranking. Sure, Warner won a Freestyle World title (or was he Runner-up?), but a lot of Freestyle and Greco champs have failed to win Nattys in the past. I know it's coulda, woulda, shoulda, but I think IF (and I know that's a big if in this program the past 15 years) those guys would have stayed healthy, they would have won some titles. Maybe them not staying healthy is on the coaches, maybe it's not. There's no way to be certain, even if it looks that way.
This isn't true. Warner was absolutely expected to win titles. He was a true elite recruit. He didn't just win freestyle titles. He went unscored on at Ironman. He was 7th in his class and that includes a historic top 3 with Spencer, Daton, and Yianni. Vito was 4. He was ahead of 3 future champs (Nick Lee, AOC, Mekhi).
Kem was also a top 10 overall recruit. The expectation for a top 10 overall recruit is an ncaa title.
But you're also missing the point somewhat. It's less about whether they were "expected" to out of high school. It's about whether they showed they were good enough to win and whether they actually did.
Marinelli: Clearly good enough to win from his sophomore year on with multiple wins over 2x champ Joseph (and others), 2x undefeated #1 seed (3 if you count covid cancellation)
Warner: 4x high AA, NCAA finalist against a bumped up 184
Eierman: 4x high AA, win over Yianni, undefeated #1 seed
Kemerer: 4x high AA, undefeated #1 seed, beaten by a guy he dominated a week earlier
Add in 2 other undefeated #1 seeds who lost in Gilman and Woods.
To not get a single title out of that group is an indictment on the staff. 1 or 2 top seeds not winning is one thing. It's really hard. Guys get upset all the time in this sport. To have 7 undefeated #1 seeds not win is an insane failure.
Here's a fun stat: Spencer Lee (2021) is the only Iowa top seed to win since Jay Borschel in 2010.
McD in 2012, but that doesn't really make this any less of a damning stat
That's hard to argue against.
Then I am sorry, but you lack serious reading comprehension and only pick out certain parts, like many do, that fit your narrative. I wasn't even the one that chose those "four gentlemen", I responded to Js for doing so.
The actual words you use MATTER. If JS had simply said, "To even have a true chance to catch and stay with PSU, you need to consistently put individuals at the top of the podium!" I would have 100% agreed with him. But, he did NOT say that.
What he did say, and the ACTUAL part I argued against, is not twistable or debatable. No one with a brain having wrestled or coached at the DI level would say 12 out of 14 AA's and 3 Finals appearances out of that group was "not producing" and "brutal". Would they say they were disappointed? Sure. But, guess what? Every damn guy that starts at the DI level comes into the room with NCAA Champ as their goal. Well over 99 percent of them don't do it. Still, a LOT of them have careers that are far from "brutal" and produce rather well.
1.) by definition not producing would be DNQ or 0-2. Even if you raised the bar since they were high end recruits, you could maybe argue not AAing as that standard. Only 1 guy wins an NCAA title per year, per weight. Over the course of your career, if you were the #1 recruit at your weight your year, you could still go up against as many as 9 other #1 recruits at that same weight. It is beyond asinine to use "not producing" to even remotely describe those careers.
2.) "brutal" is an even more exacting adjective. Brutal implies falling WAY short in a very punishing and completely lacking fashion. All of the forementioned wrestles wrestled their asses off at NCAA's. Other than a couple of freshmen losses for Marinelli and Warner, they were in every match til the end at NCAA's. Brutal just isn't a word that belongs anywhere near what those guys accomplished at NCAA's...
You are making a simple comprehension mistake.
They are not producing in the context of the discussion we're having: future recruiting.
Obviously, they had amazing careers. But in terms of convincing future top P4P recruits that they can win a title at Iowa, it doesn't help that none of those guys were able to get it done, especially the fashion in which they failed. And in terms of evaluating the staff's ability to prepare guys for the biggest moment of their careers? An undeniable failure.
7 undefeated #1 seeds and ZERO titles is indeed "brutal."
MU fan here. Let's not glaze over the fact that Eierman was a 3x AA at MU. He wasn't an Iowa recruit and a only 1x AA for the Hawks.
As an MU fan, it became very obvious Eierman was never going to win a title. He had some really good wins over some great wrestlers (Yianni, McKenna, Steiber in FS) and never beat them after the 1st match. Simply because they made adjustments to his style and he made 0 adjustments.
Last edited:
The problem with the argument is the "absolutist" mentality. Yes, it sucks and should be looked at. But, again, words MATTER. "Insane failure" ONLY applies if it is either Title or nothing. But, that isn't how NCAA's is scored.
Here are the Brands coached #1's(undefeated in bold) going into NCAA's(along with all Finalists):
2023
Lee 6th place 13.5 points
Woods 2nd place 19 points
2022
NOONE
Warner 2nd place as the 6 seed 17 points
2021
Lee 1st place 24.5 points
Eierman 2nd place 21.5 points
Kemerer 2nd place 20 points
2020
COVID
2019
Marinelli 7th place 7.5 points
Lee 1st place as the 3 seed 24.5 points
2018
NOONE
Lee 1st place as the 3 seed 27 points
2017
Gilman 3rd place 17.5 points
Clark 1st place as the 4 seed 20 points
2016
NOONE
Gilman(21 points),Clark(17) and Sorenson(17) took 2nd from the 4th, 2nd and 2nd seeds, respectively.
2015
Clark 2nd place as the 3 seed 17 points
2014
Ramos 1st place as the 3 seed 20 points.
2013
Ramos 2nd as the 2 seed 18 points
St. John 1st as the 2 seed 20 points
2012
McDonough 1st place as the 1 seed(1 loss) 26 points
Marion 2nd as the 3 seed 16 points
St John 2nd as the 2 seed 17 points
2011
McDonough 2nd place as the 2 seed 20 points
2010
McDonough 1st place as the 3 seed 24 points
Dennis 2nd place as the 2 seed 16 points
Marion 2nd place as the 6th seed 16 points
Metcalf 1st place as the 2nd seed(1 loss) 23 points
Borschel 1st place as the 2nd seed 21 points Finished undefeated and beat another undefeated in the Finals.
2009
Metcalf 2nd place as the 1 seed 21 points
2008
Slaton 2nd place as the 4 seed 17 points
Metcalf 1st place as the 1 seed(1 loss) 22 points
Perry 1st place as the 2nd seed 25 points
2007
Perry 1st place as the 2nd seed beating Hendricks 22 points
You're spending so much time to avoid the obvious problem here.
When elite recruits watch Iowa wrestlers wrestle the biggest match of their lives, they almost always lose. When they watch PSU wrestlers wrestle the biggest match of their lives, they almost always win. It's not more complicated than that.
Word is PJ Duke (#1 in class of 2025) is going to commit today. They have an insane logjam at his weight. It doesn't matter. He thinks they'll make him the best he can be and he's not wrong.
This is a cop out. It's the coaches job to help him make adjustments. And this doesn't even apply because he beat Nick Lee after Lee dominated him the year before. Then when it mattered most, Lee made the adjustments.
Even if you try to twist the words to fit your narrative, they simply do NOT apply. The funniest part is Iowa is having BY FAR their best success recruiting top 10 PFPs DURING the time frame you mention.
They have recruited 2 #1 p4p's in Chittum and Ferrari. Even with Chittum leaving he was still in the room for a year and, by all acounts, he stays if not for his father.
2020 Kennedy #3
2021 Ayala #5
2022 Chittum #1
2023 Keuter #2, Jesuroga(decided to go Military), Arnold #5
2024 Ferrari1 #1
@MSU158 just did some math to help better illustrate this:
Since 2017, Iowa had 8 undefeated #1 seeds. The field had 40 (I'm including 2018 Nolf who had the injury default loss, but we all knew who the favorite was).
Iowa went 1/8 (12.5%). The field went 25/40 (62.5%). Iowa is performing 5x worse than the field when it comes to winning with an undefeated number 1 seed. That is, in fact, an insane failure.
Since 2017, Iowa had 8 undefeated #1 seeds. The field had 40 (I'm including 2018 Nolf who had the injury default loss, but we all knew who the favorite was).
Iowa went 1/8 (12.5%). The field went 25/40 (62.5%). Iowa is performing 5x worse than the field when it comes to winning with an undefeated number 1 seed. That is, in fact, an insane failure.
Again, I keep saying words and HOW they are used matter. If you EVER simply said, "when directly comparing Iowa to PSU" your words would hold more weight. But, you haven't.
You are acting like Iowa's "production" is so bad it is making their recruiting worse. This is SO FAR from true. When comparing production to PSU NO ONE is close. But, Iowa has consistently been the 2nd best and it really is NOT close.
They are STILL recruiting very well. In fact, much better than they ever did, even back when they won titles at the beginning of Brands run. Comparing Iowa recruiting to PSU is folly. NO team in ANY sport has EVER recruited like they have been. Even tOSU falls short and their recruiting is ridiculous if you completely ignore PSU.
Idk what to tell you man. This whole conversation is about catching PSU and you're shitting a brick acting like I'm saying Iowa is worse than Illinois or something. Of course I'm comparing them to PSU and the only way that changes is if they start winning on Saturday night.
Stop wasting our time by being obtuse.
SO AAing EVERY time, with 4 of those 7 being 2nd place finishes, 1-3rd, 1 default 6th and a 7th is "insane failure"?
Plus, explain how your "field" works. Is the "field" PSU. If so, that is a RIDICULOUS use of the word "field". Many of those PSU wrestlers were "generational".
IN THE CONTEXT OF CLOSING THE GAP WITH PSU RECRUITING, YES IT IS A FAILURE.
Everybody else here understands that except you. Ask yourself why.
Field includes every non-Iowa team. It would look wayyyyy worse if I just did PSU. The fact you saw 40 undefeated #1 seeds in 6 years and thought that sounded reasonable for "just PSU" says everything.
When you used 40, that comes out to only 48. Shouldn't the total be 50? Or were there 40 other undefeated #1s?
I don't know how to be more clear than I was. Iowa - 8 undefeated #1's. The field - 40.
Total amount of undefeated #1's in those 6 tournaments - 48.
Everybody else? You mean the very few PSU fans or those that have been quite vocal against Brands on this site for quite some time?
I wanted to be sure of that before I responded. I didn't want to assume. Of those, how many are repeats?
No I mean everybody who can follow a normal argument. We're all talking about one thing and you keep showing up pissing your pants talking about a completely different thing and wondering why everybody disagrees with you.
Several, but not as many as you think. It also has no bearing.
It has SIGNIFICANT bearing. Generational talent that were so far ahead of the brackets makes a substantial difference in this argument if you are ONLY going to use Pass/Fail if a #1 seed takes 2nd instead of 1st.
Look at how many likes your posts where you're making your argument get. Look at mine. Look at the others disagreeing with you. You've gotten almost zero likes this entire time because you're being obtuse.
No, it's just a way for you to try to weasel out, but I'll go back and do the math again. In your opinion, is every repeat champ "generational." Is this based on margin of victory? What's our metric here?
A coach can't make adjustments when the wrestler refuses to change. That's how it was at MU, when he showed up for practice, and that's how it looked at Iowa. I know Tom and Terry weren't teaching him that slide-by-snap he loved to hit. Loved it so much that he refused to try much else from his feet, even before the ACL.
It does apply. Lee is an outlier. Still, he's 3-2 against Eierman and won when it mattered.
That is really a sobering stat for an Iowa fan. I have said for years that T n T are great coaches. One of the biggest weaknesses they have imo is their inability to game plan for the close coin flip matches. That coupled with Carl being a master (or Casey maybe?) is why when the rubber hits the road PSU almost always beats Iowa in the head to head matches. I am hoping it is them being too stubborn to game plan opponents as that is very easy to fix and needs to be addressed if so. The whole "we worry about ourselves and impose our own will on the other guy" is such a terrible strategy in today's wrestling world. That has to change for Iowa to get on top again. What worked for Tom and Terry doesn't work very often now and I sure hope they have realized that by now.
Disclaimer: I think this is a dumb way to think about it, but because @MSU158 wants it:
I removed 13 titles between Starocci, Brooks, Yianni, Gable x2, Nolf x2, Bo x2, Zain x 2, Cox, and Snyder. I also added 1 to each column because I missed 2018 Gross and 2019 Rivera's losses were up a weight against Meredith and Micic. Gross won, Rivera lost at NCAAs.
That brings the % for "non-generational" to 13/29 (45%). Congrats MSU, Iowa is only performing *checks notes* 3.5x worse than the field. I feel so much better now.
I removed 13 titles between Starocci, Brooks, Yianni, Gable x2, Nolf x2, Bo x2, Zain x 2, Cox, and Snyder. I also added 1 to each column because I missed 2018 Gross and 2019 Rivera's losses were up a weight against Meredith and Micic. Gross won, Rivera lost at NCAAs.
That brings the % for "non-generational" to 13/29 (45%). Congrats MSU, Iowa is only performing *checks notes* 3.5x worse than the field. I feel so much better now.
There is NO context where that is "insane failure". Saying so is beyond ridiculous. Most of those guys had insanely close wins to get to that undefeated point, including making it to the Finals.
But, I will again try to digress.
To be clear, I am looking at this from a former DI wrestler and as a coach. Those words just don't apply to me and I can't STAND absolutes. As such, words like "not producing", "brutal" and "insane failure" have NO BUSINESS being used in ANY context when talking about those wrestlers...
If you were only looking at it from a fan persepective, I can see that. But, there is so much more to it.
1.) Marinelli-When he went in undefeated, he had a field consisting of Joseph(2x champ 3x finalist), Lewis(world level medalist, 2x Finalist, 1x Champ), Marsteller. Of his 27 wins 6 of those were by 2 or less and 5 more by 3. It was more a miracle that he went undefeated until the quarters than it was him "insanely failing" because he "only" AA'd.
Even then.....But, I don't want to be that guy keeping this going back and forth.
Here is my attempt at a very civil, friendly reply from a coaching perspective and then I try to bow out and not bog this topic down any further:
Looking just at the 1 out of 8, I do wish the coaches could have figured out a way to win more of those. But, the ONLY Loss that surprised me was Gilman. His not choosing down was a bad coaching decision in my opinion. That match, i DO put on the coaches.
The rest, I just can't say the Iowa guys didn't lose to as good as, or even better wrestlers.
Lee went 1 for 2. But, it was obvious to see for anyone with eyes that he was a shell of himself at NCAA's and the guy he lost to was all over him the 1st time they wrestled as well. A healthy Lee wins and I just don't know how the coaches could have done anything different to get him there last season.
Woods-He lost to another undefeated guy that could easily have been the #1 seed and has continued to prove how good he is at International tournaments. I can't take one bad thing away from that match.
Marinelli-He won 6 matches by 2 or less and another 5 matches by 3 that season. Lewis and Marsteller were TERRIBLE matchups for him and Joseph and Wick had beat him several times during their careers. As much as I wanted him to win, I can't put his finishes on the coaches.
Kemerer-At first, this was the closest loss to me adding to coaching. However, having watched Starocci over the next few seasons, the guy is just too fundamentally sound. He made all the correct adjustments and kept Kemerer at a distance until he was out of gas. Sadly, I don't think Kemerer was every going to beat Starocci again, no matter how many times they wrestled.
Eierman-He had lost to Lee several times and BARELY won at B1G's that year wrestling a nearly perfect match fit right to his strengths. Winning a takedown battle with Lee, or at least keeping it even to try to take advantage of his mat wrestling was always going to be a lower percentage play.
Metcalf-Caldwell had already beaten him and was a TERRIBLE matchup stylistically.
When you JUST look at the number, 1 out of 8 sucks. I COMPLETELY agree with that. But, Gilman, to me atleast, is the ONLY guy that lost who wasn't, at the very least, losing a toss up match. Being a signifcant to overwhelming favorite makes a huge difference in this argument. To me, Gilman was the only 1 that could fit that standard.
Last edited:
Here's the thing. You can say all of those things about every single guy who won a title for those other teams. They're just better at overcoming them.
You want to excuse the coaches. That's fine. I want to watch Iowa win titles. You've given up on that. That's fine. I don't know why you're wasting our time then.
Simultaneously the angriest, yet most complacent fans ever. Do you all even want Iowa to win? The losing is bad, but the people in charge are not to be criticized?
But, the 1st part you say simply isn't true for many of them. Retherford wasn't going to and hadn't lost to any of the entire field his last 3 years. Nolf, except for a significant injury was the same, and still won even with the injury. By the end of his career Nickal was so much better than everyone INCLUDING Martin that there was no way he was losing to anyone. Taylor was so far ahead of everyone but Dake it was laughable. Ruth was waxing studs like Lewnes and Amuch and still pinned Dean and beat him convincingly after taking him seriously. Starocci is damn near impossible to score on. Brooks is so much better than everyone on his feet.
That is 10 undefeated seasons and 17 NCAA titles amongst 7 guys, with Starocci and Brooks still having time left. Iowa has only had 1 guy at that level and he won 3 out of 4....
As far as excusing the coaches go, I still expect more from them. I sure as hell haven't given up. But, I think it is more about how ridiculous PSU has been than it his about Iowa somehow underperforming. To me, what PSU has done has NEVER been done before and that includes Iowa under Gable. What Sanderson has created at PSU is a machine like no other. They recruit the best. They have the absolute best coaching staff in the country. They adjust the best. They have the most funding. They have the best RTC. They are located in the best spot possible for wrestling.
Where I believe we actually differ the most is realistic expectations. You are comparing the Iowa coaches to PSU and giving them a "fail" based on that. Meanwhile, I do NOT think it is fair to compare anyone to PSU and EXPECT them to match it. No one EVER has and I think what PSU has done will end up being a Cy Young type record where the sport has evolved so much to the point no one could ever come close to matching it again.
Similar threads
