Taylor didn't have near the brackets that Metcalf did. He was a stud like many others in the 20-50 range.
Dake owns Taylor
- Thread starter WildTurk
- Start date
Jebus, I'm not that old. But I've read a lot about Reed and Wittenberg - they were absolute freaks. Robin Reed wrestled at a lighter weight but beat every member of the 1924 US olympic team - never lost a match period! At any weight class. Reed was almost Houdini like.
Whittenberg did not start wrestling until college yet he ran up a 300 plus match winning streak wrestling the best in the world - [ a 300 match winning streak starting in 6th grade is impressive; winning 300 in a row starting in college is hard to imagine]. He won olympic gold in 1948 and barely lost out in the 1952 finals.
Taylor's biggest problem, which we've already pointed out, is that whether he's a Top 20, Top 50 or Top 100 wrestler he has TWO Top 10 wrestlers at his weights at the same time he's trying to establish himself both collegiately and internationally. Taylor is really freaking good but he has TWO all-time greats to try to compete with to try and make a World / Olympic team
I did too but T.J. winning percentage was too much to ignore. BTW I left Streibler off my list - my bad. Apologies to the Streeber family.
I was just bustin' your balls. Good info on those two. I'm going to have to do some research.
When you are comparing wrestlers, are you taking overall accomplishments or simply college career. IMO, when looking simply at colllege career, I don't think that you can list JB above Taylor. JB has really made a name for himself after college. Don't get me wrong, JB was a very good college wrestler. I simply think that his excellence on the international scene has some advancing his college accomplishments.
This is because you don't know much about this list. Think what you want but if you knew these guys, your opinion would change. Your eyes are on Taylor and you're not open to seeing anything else. I cant help you.
Last edited:
And if you think Kolate is not a true great, you don't know enough about the sport. Kolate was a beast and then some.
For the record, I don't believe I added JB to my list. I know you did not say I did but I don't see his in this conversation in college.
Rex Peery and Ed Peery. You want old-timers, I'll give you old-timers.
Pablow - I know a man in Illinois City who defeated Doug Blubaugh in the NCAA semi-finals. Lloyd Corwin was a 2X AA for Cornell College who only lost 3 matches in his career. Lloyd is a true gentleman who comes to the Coe/Cornell meet every year and the Division III Championships when they are in Cedar Rapids.
Yep. Taylor is tough to put high in the greatest of all time rankings because he just didn't have the competition others have had. I'm trying to think of his top wins in college. St John, Fittery, Caldwell, Kokesh? All are fine wrestlers but none of his victims are lighting it up internationally. I think if he had beaten Dake in college and preferably NCAA's, he'd easily have a top 20 claim. The dude did wreck everyone in front of him not named Dake or Jenkins and wasn't really tested. Hard to not be a fan as he certainly put points on the board.
You're right. I tend to adjust my views of how good a college wrestler is by how they perform in freestyle. Sometimes it's hard to tell how good a D1 wrestler is and freestyle result, at least for me, clarify things. For instance I find it impossible to say DT was a better college wrestler than John Smith even though by any objective standard DT was better. But Smith had some injuries that held him back and he won a world title while in college. On the other hand IMO it's not valid to upgrade Bill Zadick's college carreer based on his world title because it occurred too many years after he graduated. He simply improved a great deal IMO.
Les Gutches would be a good example. I knew he was good in college but it was difficult to tell how good because of his consevative style. His world championship sealed the deal for me. Like Gutches, Dieringer is likely to be judged ultimately on freesyle results because it's just too hard to rate him due to his competition and style.
If you keep posting these kind of stories people are going to think your older than me.
I kinda agree here. Seek Jones was a world champ and never an NCAA champ. He will be considered elite due to his world title but no where in the conversation in college. KJ won world and Olympic gold but again, not even in the discussion. Gutches was a more conservative wrestler but that made him no less dominant.
I keep trying to say it to me, David is among the college champion elite but he is not among the saints. His
Comp was light and he did not have success against what comp he actually did have albeit 2 guys. We have listed 30 to 40 guys who had the kind of success of legend. I like new fans but have some respect. Take the time to read and view some of our legends.
Lastly, if Taylor gets a pass on his comp, I don't want to here jack squat about Pat Smith. The 1st 4 time champ who was a wreaking ball at times being dismissed????? Keeping in mind the only reason Pat red shirt d was because of OSU sanctions. Champ as a true freshman.
We will never agree on who is number one as it is impossible to know in this life. We can get together on who is legitimately in the cnversation near the top. Make a list of the top 100, Taylor might should be on it. I will concede that. I will never concede top 50.
I did the same thing. If you say hamachi or brands, it's always both.
Lou could be in there easily.
Weren't there three Banachs? Three Kislers? Anymore threes?
I definitely consider Kolat a great, but Taylor slightly better. It's hard to compare when you're talking about 40 guys and I'm talking about 1, but since you think Kolat is clearly better let's compare their college careers.
Kolat - 111-7 record. 53 falls. 2 NCAA titles, 2nd twice
Taylor - 107-3. 74 Falls. 2 NCAA titles, 2nd and 3rd
I think you got the record backwards chief. (NCAA finishes) You're also not taking into account who culottes seven losses were too. Also not considering the guys he beat. Kolat was a punishing and very dynamic rustler. You have the bonus points in your head. They are important yes but that measure is limited. How many of those bonus points game against guys that he shouldn't have. Taylor simply did not have the death of competition. Not his fault but it still there. You've already stated you don't have the death of knowledge of the history of the sport in these athletes. Baby just open your mind to the fact that that there might be a number of guys that are just better. Does not take away from him or what he's accomplished. Just means that others did it a little better and with a much deeper talent base to compete against.
Kolat wrestled as a true freshman. 5 of his 7 loses came that year, and he still made the ncaa finals
I have been polite so far so don't insult me.
No. I don't put Taylor top 40. So, no.
So now this debate is going to peter out into mild insults because what you meant by "one of the greatest ever" was top 40ish and you are faulting the other poster for reasonably interpreting your initial comment to mean that you thought he was top 5 or top 10? On those terms, it had been a decent debate, and I enjoyed the back and forth. If the question now is whether we can all agree that Taylor was a top 50 all-time collegiate wrestler, I don't think there is going to be a lot of dispute about that. But it's not that interesting a question.
I personally think he's better than top 40, but I was just going off 255's list, which he said there were 40. He then said he's around there, but not above those 40. That's his list not mine. I just asked if he didn't think a person who's 'ranked 40ish' as not one of the greatest. He said no, so that's that. He's got a good list, and I agree there are a lot of names that should be considered above Taylor's, but he's not going to convince me DT is not one of the greatest college wrestlers. Besides, my original opinion was pointing to the fact of how awesome Burroughs was, not to debate where in the P4P list DT ranks.
He completely disagrees with my opinion, and I with his apparently.
Great list Pablow but I'd definitely have to add Randy Lewis to it. If not for a dislocated elbow injury sustained in his match against Jim Gibbons's I think Randy could have been the best Hawkeye wrestler I've ever had the pleasure of watching during the past 40 years. I am 100% certain that he was one of the most entertaining wrestlers on/off the mat who ever wore a Hawk singlet. Randy was one of the very few wrestlers who actually worked for a Pin each time he stepped on the mat.
Greatest ever is not a top 40 title. When you say he is among the greatest ever, your talking about a much narrower list. My point is that with so many guys ahead, greatest ever is not a conversation he is in. (I actually said 100 but stopped.)
There have been 4-4X Champs, 24-3X Champs and 104-2X Champs and more guys than you think that hit the finals each eligible year. (132 guys with almost 300 titles. Wow) That puts Taylor in a group of 132 of the "greats" Lets be generous and say the greatest is made up of the top 15%. That's 20. He is not there. I guess we could argue what number of guys make up the "greatest" list. Since you don't believe total of number of titles is a deciding factor, how many of the one timers add to this list of greats? When I hear "among the greatest ever", I see that as rarified status. It has to be. If not, greatest means nothing. Of that group of 132, we could reasonably discuss that there were 1 or 2 per decade that CHANGED the sport, My point is, being great does not mean greatest. Greatest is a big deal we as fans should defend or we get lost in the "everyone is a winner" mentality.
Keep in mind that more than a few of these three timers only had 3 shots by the rule of three years of eligibility. That means those guys made the team each year, qualified for the championship and won EACH year they could. Does that not put them a little ahead?
I know your original point and it was good. My point is you can not make any claim to naming greatest ever if your view of the sport is just the last 5, 10 or even 20 years. We have been at this in an organized manor for over 100 years. That's my point.
The last post you responded was not pushing back on opinions. He was pushing back on that fact that what started as a fun and lively debate, you added an uncalled for insult and ruined the discussion.
Throw away the name, just look at the following resume. If you don't think that means wrestler X is one of the greatest, then so be it.
2 x Hodge winner
2 x champion
4 x finalist
134-3 record, 97% win pct, 91% bonus percentage
only losses were to NCAA champions, 1 timer/2 finalist and a 4 timer
Now that's enough of me defending Taylor, again I was just trying to emphasize Burroughs skills
The hodge is restively new to wrestling.
Similar records exist.
His only real test were to NCAA champions.
I am done as well. The sport is bigger and has more history than it appears.
-------
Bubba Jenkins, who pinned Taylor, is not of Dake's caliber either.
For the record, I don't consider Taylor in the top 15-20 range. Historically, there are just too many guys more worthy. I think Taylor in the top 50-100 range would be about right.
----
Don't know if that's true or not, but remember, back in the Gable era, there were only 3 years of eligibility, so a bit apples and oranges when comparing to someone who got 4 years.
I do know that the record for consecutive falls (10), and total falls (13) at ncaa tourney by Gable still stands to this day.
Yup...I allocated for that. Also looked at what would have been TF's back in his day. Think I didn't factor in the freshman years. It was during the summer so I was bored.
I left Lewis and Striebler off. Obviously I'm not among the Top 50 all-time greats in making all-time great lists.
