Come on. We all know there is a long tradition of using 15 years as a standard measuring unit of time in many cultures.
Last edited:
Lightweight U is not Iowa
- Thread starter butchinmi
- Start date
Why would he argue with you? Probably not going to change your mind either way. If you think Flo has a bias against one of the biggest sources of their financial viability (the Iowa fanbase), why would anyone argue with you?
According to TR Foley, the advanced collective farming districts of pre-Brezhnev Soviet Russia based their target per hectare yields on 15 year cycles as that represented 3 complete 5-year Agriculture plans, so I also think it can make sense in this context as well. That is if you believe, as TR does, that the standard decade is an outmoded measuring unit preferred mainly by hyper-capitalist, patriarchal Kleptocracies like the present-day United States.
I mean, it's really that simple.
Iowa and Minny were the only two schools that came to mind when it came to the 'weight' rankings per university... Iowa lightweights and Gopher upper weights were what i thought. PSU has been great recently, but I dont know enough about NCAA placings from too many other schools pre- 2008ish. I'd have to go review the brackets.
Also.. Saw you mentioned on twitter you are having health issues.. hope you get well soon, and can make it to NCAAs this year.
I was trying to do this. You did it much better.
I don't think it's an anti Iowa thing, I thinks it's "we've discovered something that no one would have thought, come read our article and subscribe!!" They want to get clicks and get people talking about their article.
Never before seen photos taken behind the scenes at Flo HQ where Jaroslav and CP were calculating the rankings:
hey again - no troll for serious post - I LOVE the passion and discussion the article generated. For this particular series, I am not involved in the editorial, just the numbers, so can't speak for the headline or written bit, but for real the simple boring reason we chose 15 years is that is was totally arbitrary. but think of it as all relevant results of a current's high school senior's lifetime, if you need a reason.
and so I found the implication that there was some insidious anti-Iowa bias for choosing the time frame rather humorous, so I wrote the last post as a joke. please take it in the good nature in which it was intended.
all the points about how the results and implications change if you picked a different time frame are valid. excellent ideas for follow up articles. stay tuned!
also, spoiler alert, if you combine 125 and 133 over the past 15 years, Iowa's results are the most impressive. beyond that, you'll have to wait and see!
and so I found the implication that there was some insidious anti-Iowa bias for choosing the time frame rather humorous, so I wrote the last post as a joke. please take it in the good nature in which it was intended.
all the points about how the results and implications change if you picked a different time frame are valid. excellent ideas for follow up articles. stay tuned!
also, spoiler alert, if you combine 125 and 133 over the past 15 years, Iowa's results are the most impressive. beyond that, you'll have to wait and see!
Please start a faux Foley twitter account.
Lame ass thread hey I know I made a couple poopers but come on.....
Let's talk Iowa wrestling!!!
Let's talk Iowa wrestling!!!
Never before seen photos taken behind the scenes at Flo HQ where Jaroslav and CP were calculating the rankings:
just me and @wrestlingnomad on this one - though CP is providing valuable twitter hype
How did you find how many points each guy scored at NCAA's? Is there a database somewhere with that info, or did you have to go manually calculate each based on their placement and advancements + bonus points in the bracket?
Are all you guys at Flo so thin skinned? I almost always like the content and the work that CP, Willie and all the folks at Flo do, but sometimes, when a little criticism comes Flo's way, you guys seem to lash out and either try and shout the other guy down or make silly sarcastic comments that imply stupidity or flawed logic. Reading CP's tweets on the 125 topic, its basically a replay of past incidents where someone is critical of a ranking or a post or a topic that he has weighed in on.
15 years might be the right time frame, but someone that thinks going back 18 years, for the reasons of the changes in weight classifications, might not be ignorant, or silly or even trying to get more favorable statistics, it might just be it makes more sense to them, in the same way that using 15 years made sense to Flo.
I think Flo is one of the best things to ever happen to wrestling media. I check it multiple times each day, i try and always listen to FRL and try and respect the opinions of the writers, even when I don't agree with it. If you all want to be considered real journalists, which I think you are, then you have to either be willing to ignore the critiques or at least try and understand where they are coming from and stop lashing out and getting in to a "i know you are but what am I?" type argument every time someone disagrees.
I am an Iowa fan, I like this article and did not think about going back for 3 extra years, but when it was mentioned and the reasons why were given, it seemed to make sense. It's not right or wrong, but it's a logical point of view, for that reason, it does not have to be accepted, but it shouldn't be belittled as is being done.
thats what we struggled with the most, (the time frame question was settled in 5 seconds and 2 twitter DMs). we don't have actual NCAA points scored going back very many years. other data we do have, but no public database exists (yet anyway, that I know of). the first point system in the 125 article was just the quickest, simplest one I could create of that included all NQs. for future weights and articles we'll be approximating NCAA points based on finish. it's not perfect, but then what is?
I think most of us understood that and appreciate the banter. Obviously this is an Iowa board so we are a bit biased and stick up for our program. Regardless, it's nice to have this sort of material to spice things up until the season starts.
If you'd be interested, last year prior to NCAAs, as a means of predicting 'pojected points' for AA finishes, I calculated the average points scored for every AA finish (1st - 8th) through every weight from the 2013-2015 NCAAs (the only ones available at the time on trackwrestling). Seeing this sparked my interest again, and I need to add 2016 NCAAs to the numbers, and was thinking of going through and getting the average points scored by R12, R16, R24 guys as well, though there probably wont be much variance in those. Not sure if its exactly statistically accurate, since it's only 4 years, but I felt it better represented points scored than just the baseline number of points with no bonus, at least for predictions anyway.
Let me get this straight because I have been busy all day and too tired to investigate: If they chose ten years, it's Iowa. If they choose 20 years, it's Iowa. But if it's 15 years, it's Cornell.
Yes...because if he did it on here, nobody would see...but alas no, he is not hunting clicks. Least the foreigner is on here.
Sensitivity is overated. CP and Willie are the first to jump on Twitter and trash Hawkeyereport when they see feed back that doesn't make them "feel" good or paints them in a negative light. They act like 11 year olds that got their Halloween candy taken. Very thin skinned and unprofessional! BooHoo! 
I know from personal experience that ISU is lightweight U. Nobody here could hold their alcohol.
don't know about numbers anybody can interprupt them for their purpose, but there is onething that makes iowa the best place for lighter weight wrestlers, terry brands.
I too think Flo should have factored in WTT's, OTT's, University, Jr Worlds, 133, and incoming Spencer Lee's prospects when determining which NCAA program has been the most productive at 125.
#ItsRigged
what is Jammenz's twitter handle?Iowa and Minny were the only two schools that came to mind when it came to the 'weight' rankings per university... Iowa lightweights and Gopher upper weights were what i thought. PSU has been great recently, but I dont know enough about NCAA placings from too many other schools pre- 2008ish. I'd have to go review the brackets.
Also.. Saw you mentioned on twitter you are having health issues.. hope you get well soon, and can make it to NCAAs this year.
The most revealing of Pyles' Tweets lost inside of his typical cherry picked , flawed logic, condescending rant was the one that shows his limited knowledge of college wrestling and it's history. The one where he said 126 is essentially the old time equivalent of 125. If you don't know you don't know.
Last edited:
I found it really hilarious because from my albeit limited research the HR is the only place he was truly getting negative feedback (he got some on twitter once he put it out there) and he went to Twitter and didn't even call the particular set of fans out in his "sub-tweet" but it's pretty obvious to the source of the "Iowa paranoia" he was referring to was coming from.
All of it made funnier because I feel like he's called out "sub-tweeters" (is this even a word?) before. Idk maybe I just have a strange sense of humor to find this all funny.
Tl;dr the wrestling media isn't your typical media.
Last edited:
You too must not have been around back then. I bet you could count the number of guys who started the year at 126lbers who wrested 118+7 in the 1997-98 year on 1 hand.
I guess that is why they couldn't grasp going back any farther. If he can't understand that 118=125, 126=133 ... then they would have botched going back any father up anyways.
I guess that is why they couldn't grasp going back any farther. If he can't understand that 118=125, 126=133 ... then they would have botched going back any father up anyways.
Last edited:
If they would have gone back to 2000, which I did, then Iowa is #1 at 125 and 133. Sneak peak to tomorrow. Iowa will be 2nd or 3rd at 133, again if you go back to 2000, Iowa would be #1 because Juergens won it both years. Oklahoma State will be #1 tomorrow at 133 and Minnesota will be in the mix as well. I will post mine tomorrow from 2000 on. Makes more sense to do the entire 2000 decade if you are going to do it. I am going to try and do this for every weight by Friday and do a "Lightweight 125-133", "Light Middleweight 141-149", "Middle Weight 157-165" "Heavy Middleweight 174-184", and "Heavyweight 197-285".
I'm a lot younger so you are correct. I need a history lesson every once in a while happy to oblige as well
No problem. 118 was the weight with night before weigh-ins. When they changed the rules mid-season they added 7 lbs and moved the weigh-ins to same day. Almost everyone across the board took the 7 lbs and 118 effectively became 125. 126 become 133... Just seems like something a guy covering college wrestling would know.
YES, yes he does. A different argument is presented with different years with solid backup reasoning and his response is to go on a twitter rant against Iowa fans.
Weak sauce.
Who cares back to 2000. Iowa is and will be for the foreseeable future, the king at 125. Throw in 133 an Iowa is lightweight U. What we need to start worrying about is "team" U.
Meh...by appealing to folks on Twitter that might not like Iowa and trying to generate a twitter debate by subtweeting us (something he gets on others for). I like CP but it's getting old.
Similar threads
