PSU only 22.5 points away. If 5/6 of their finalists win that's 20 more points. And that doesn't count Truax and Kasak in the consis, let alone bonus. And here I thought it was safe when Davis and Nagao went down. Boy was I wrong.
The Hawks point total record is in jeopardy.
- Thread starter LIV4GOD
- Start date
Discussion we have been having when they get the record is there an asterisk since under different rules making it easier to get majors and TF’s? Just curious on thoughts
I think we'll get less PSU turds over here if we just give credit where credit is due, forget the asterisk, and focus on a GoFundMe page to help us buy anything that will help turn the tide at least a little bit.
I was there in '97 when we came out of nowhere to not only win, but break the point record.
We also did it by winning 5/6 final matches. That will just gall me to see them take that record.
We also did it by winning 5/6 final matches. That will just gall me to see them take that record.
I don’t think they’ll quite get to 170. I’m going with four champs and minimal points in the morning for them.
It's a different record with different rules. Even just re-scoring Iowa's 170 by current placement and advancement scoring and they had 171.5 without whatever extra they'd have gotten with 3 point takedowns. It will be weird if they do break it by a point or two, but then NCAA reverts back to 2 point takedowns again so it wouldn't likely ever be broken. Everybody that's a fan pre-2011 will recognize the difference, doesn't need an official asterisk, and PSU fans will think it's important as Cael tries to match Gable. I honestly didn't think it would make a big difference, but then a match like Mess and Caliendo turned into an 8 point major and a bonus point, rather than the 8-3 type match it really would've been previously where it wasn't close to a bonus nor felt that convincing. There just wasn't much chance of a major with two point takedowns if you gave one up yourself and still won unless you got some backpoints along the way. Now you just win the takedown battle by two and get riding time and you almost have it. Stalling point, penalty point, back points, anything else and it's a major. Just feels like you should at least need three more takedowns than someone to be that convincing of a win.
This is why you dont change the rules. it make s record keeping impossible. Riined baseball, now ruining wrestling. Iowa’s record will bevebe broken. Can’t conpare eras.
Mess didn't win the TD battle by 2. It was 5-1. Under the old rules that would have been a 12-8 win for Mess, with 6 of Caliendo's points coming from ESC.
The new scoring is much more reflective of the actual beating that Mess put on tonight.
The new TD and NF scoring gives wrestlers the incentive to score points,. Maybe we should give that a try instead of complaining about the rules, and how it'd be different in the old days.
I believe if the 1986 team was scored with the 1997 system they would have had around 173.
Well then f*** Penn State.
I don't give a shyte about scoring records. When was the last time a Hawkeye v Lion wrestler didn't go h2h in the NCAAs?
If PSU tops 170, then they've earned the record. The record is called "Most Team Points in the NCAA Wrestling Tournament", not "Most Team Points in the NCAA Wrestling Tournament under 1997 Rules"
Don’t they have biggest margin of victory in the bag?
Might be, points records don’t excite me. Team and individual titles first, maybe margin of victory for team next, then a team record
If your favorite team wins the Super Bowl you don’t care if they win by the biggest margin of victory , you’re just happy for the win.
If your favorite team wins the Super Bowl you don’t care if they win by the biggest margin of victory , you’re just happy for the win.
Last edited:
The tournament scoring rules have always been changing. The rules in 1997 gave that team some advantages that previous years did not. Back in 97, there were still unbalanced brackets which allowed for extra advancement points that aren’t possible now. Now you get the full 1.5 bonus points for a TF even you did’t score any back points. Sports change, they always have. Asterisks are for wussies.
Isn’t the Iowa 1983 team the best scoring team ever if they used the current rules or everyone used the rules then?
Either way , when you win big you win big.
Let’s take the scoring differences out of the equation and PSU still needed two returning AA transfers, a Mitchell Mesenbrink transfer, and a fifth year from Brooks to beat it.
It would have been nice if the 1997 team could have added Bill Zadick for a fifth year at 142 lol.
It would have been nice if the 1997 team could have added Bill Zadick for a fifth year at 142 lol.
Credit to PSU for building a dynasty that has put them in a position to even make this possible. What Cael has done is nothing short of amazing.
Yeah, yeah, rule changes, NIL, unlimited transfers, etc. Put any asterisk or explanation you want on it. Every other program--particularly Iowa--had the opportunity to follow the same blueprint. But they didn't.
Tom can't consistently put 100 points on the board. (No one can.) Cael is doing 150, 160, 170.
Woulda, coulda, shoulda. Get over the "Yeah, but..." mentality. Give credit where credit is due.
Yeah, yeah, rule changes, NIL, unlimited transfers, etc. Put any asterisk or explanation you want on it. Every other program--particularly Iowa--had the opportunity to follow the same blueprint. But they didn't.
Tom can't consistently put 100 points on the board. (No one can.) Cael is doing 150, 160, 170.
Woulda, coulda, shoulda. Get over the "Yeah, but..." mentality. Give credit where credit is due.
I’d agree, the rules now are the rules.
If Penn State does break the record, Iowa should put a large sculpture of an asterisk outside of CHA. Just below the asterisk should be a plaque that explains Penn State holds the record only because the scoring rules changed and Iowa Wrestling will forever hold the legit team scoring record.
You guys got a Joe Pa statue sitting around anywhere that we could use to make it?
You forgot to include the extra Covid year, but yes, I agree with your overall point. Iowa needs to figure it out. TNT aren’t getting it done.
I agree with give credit where it is due.
Having said that.
‘86 and ‘97 did not have a transfer portal, 3 point td (accounting for 9% increase in bonus) nor NIL leverage, 4 point NF and out of bounds rules.
For all intense purposes, it’s a new sport.
Good for them if they pull it off. Records are meant to be broken.
Honor the past. It’s just time for those of us and the old guard to get over the past and find a way to be a more constructive fan
Having said that.
‘86 and ‘97 did not have a transfer portal, 3 point td (accounting for 9% increase in bonus) nor NIL leverage, 4 point NF and out of bounds rules.
For all intense purposes, it’s a new sport.
Good for them if they pull it off. Records are meant to be broken.
Honor the past. It’s just time for those of us and the old guard to get over the past and find a way to be a more constructive fan
Last edited:
If the program is more worried about the record (which I don’t think they are) than the points gap between first and second place, NCAA wrestling as a competitive sport is finished. What really amazes me, and has for several years, is how Penn State has been dominant for so long, but everyone outside of Iowa still views them and Cael as the good guys, and they are honored to get beat by them. Usually, like Iowa in the 80s and 90s, when you dominate a sport, the rest of the sport grows to hate you. Hopefully the program does anything it takes to get back on top.
Jeff Mcginness red-shirted on the 1997 team. He won 142 the following season. Mena lost in tie breaker….on a team with 5 champs
Care to make the first donation to the Go Fund Me program we will get started with your idea?
There has been discussions since the gambling suspensions that PSU would probably set the scoring record. It's not a surprise to most.
Different rules, NIL, Transfer Portal, 3 rules that were not around in 1997 and throw in COVID years. Can’t compare the 2 scores apples to apples.
