Jump to content

Sanderson, by weight class


Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, JVStateChamp said:

Their careers are very similar Snyder is a 4x finalist and 3x Champ, while Gable is a 2x Champion and has a 3rd place finish (I would also assume that had the 2020 year happened Gable would have won) But there is definitely an argument to be made that Snyder is the best heavyweight. 

I am not disagreeing at all, what I am saying is that Snyder lost his senior season and had many competitive matches.  Steveson didn't have any competitive matches his senior year or his junior year.  He did his soph season, but so did Snyder.

Steveson had a good percentage higher bonus rate than Snyder as well.

"I know actually nothing.  It isn't even conjecture at this point." - me

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, nhs67 said:

I am not disagreeing at all, what I am saying is that Snyder lost his senior season and had many competitive matches.  Steveson didn't have any competitive matches his senior year or his junior year.  He did his soph season, but so did Snyder.

Steveson had a good percentage higher bonus rate than Snyder as well.

Snyder was also an undersized 97kg Freestyle Wrestler giving up a loooot of weight. His loss to Coon was proof showing that he could be out-horsed if the man was big enough. 

Man, I wish we could've seen Steveson again in College or Freestyle.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, Lleynor said:

Snyder was also an undersized 97kg Freestyle Wrestler giving up a loooot of weight. His loss to Coon was proof showing that he could be out-horsed if the man was big enough. 

Man, I wish we could've seen Steveson again in College or Freestyle.

The weight class is the weight class.  Giving him the benefit of the doubt, despite Steveson having more dominant seasons against better competition because he lacked size shouldn't be a consideration when talking 'Best HWT Ever' in collegiate wrestling.  The weight class is 285lbs, not 285lbs* (with an asterisk meaning that if you are a smaller heavyweight you get more benefits of the doubt).

"I know actually nothing.  It isn't even conjecture at this point." - me

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Truzzcat said:

To me he wrestled at a time where I think Heavyweight is the strongest it's ever been I mean he won two fields with guys that went on to win NCAA titles as well as beating a multiple time world team member in one of his finals. I am by no means arguing against Gable honestly when making those pics he was one of my more confident guys. Dake was a hard rank given he did it at 4 weights, but I think 3 wins over DT in a single season warrants the spot. If MM runs the table the next 3 years which feels extremely likely I think he would eclipse that spot but until then I feel ok with Dake. I also thought about Imar but as good as cenzo was two finals losses to him really dings him to me.

you're saying Messenbrink eclipses Dake if he wins 3?  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

not for a career but at 165 given Dake was only there for one season.

Sounds like everyone gets a blue ribbon?

So with the same analysis, Dake is the worst 4-timer at 141, 149, 157 and 165.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, headshuck said:


Sounds like everyone gets a blue ribbon?

So with the same analysis, Dake is the worst 4-timer at 141, 149, 157 and 165.

The question was posed as the best wrestler of all time at each weight. Dake beat DT 3 times in a single season at 165 which I would rate over anyone else I considered putting Imar but chose to value you those wins in over 4 finals but 2 losses to cenzo. If MM goes on to win 3 and make a final with his only loss being to Carr in a tournament where he out placed KOT I will be content saying he was better at 165.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Truzzcat said:

The question was posed as the best wrestler of all time at each weight. Dake beat DT 3 times in a single season at 165 which I would rate over anyone else I considered putting Imar but chose to value you those wins in over 4 finals but 2 losses to cenzo. If MM goes on to win 3 and make a final with his only loss being to Carr in a tournament where he out placed KOT I will be content saying he was better at 165.

Dake should also get credit for winning his fourth NC, even if the previous three were at lesser weights.

There isn't a 165lber since he was a 165lber that would beat him in an actual match.  That should count as should ability.

Career at 165?  Okay you can give it to someone else, but saying someone else is a better 165lber is categorically wrong.

"I know actually nothing.  It isn't even conjecture at this point." - me

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Lleynor said:

Many of us, including myself, consider Cael as the greatest Collegiate Wrestler. 159-0 pretty much speaks for itself. 

However, would you say he's the greatest 184 of all time? 197? 

I heard a discussion on ESPN this morning talking about the best at each position in the NFL respectively, and made me curious of the best of all time at each weight. I'm not stating the best individual season at each weight, but who was considered the best for a career at each. I guess one could look at individual seasons as well. Just curious of others opinions. 

Are you considering just college careers?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, nhs67 said:

You questioning a soft looking, 245lb true frosh is legitimate.

You questioning the 260lb version that beat Parris in the '21 finals, let alone the 265lb version that beat Schultzy in '22 is just plain silly.  There isn't a better or more athletic heavyweight than either of those versions of Steveson, ever. 

If you are talking best career, that is different - perhaps.  Maybe not, though.  If you are talking the best heavyweight ever, the answer for 1 and 2 are the same guy.

Is being athletic give you more cred than winning more titles?  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, Alces Alces Gigas said:

Is being athletic give you more cred than winning more titles?  

It does when the gap is as wide as Steveson showed it was and it is utilized as effectively as it was.

"I know actually nothing.  It isn't even conjecture at this point." - me

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, nhs67 said:

The weight class is the weight class.  Giving him the benefit of the doubt, despite Steveson having more dominant seasons against better competition because he lacked size shouldn't be a consideration when talking 'Best HWT Ever' in collegiate wrestling.  The weight class is 285lbs, not 285lbs* (with an asterisk meaning that if you are a smaller heavyweight you get more benefits of the doubt).

But did he ever wrestle D1 @ 184 or 197?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No way to leave Dan Hodge off any such list. Never lost in college and never taken down his entire college career. Pinned over 73 percent of foes.  His junior year, Hodge won the NCAA title with four straight pins, the freestyle title with five pins and then entered the Greco-Roman nationals (his first ever try in that style) and won with four more pins. So, he won three national titles in less than a month's time with 13 straight pins. And his impact on the sport was such that to this day he remains (sadly) the only wrestler to ever appear on the cover of Sports Illustrated.

7

  • Bob 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, AgaveMaria said:

At the light weight I'll take Uetake and Steven Abas over Spencer.

 

Before taylor won worlds he was in the category of really good but forgettable, Lee is in a similar situation.

"Half measures are a coward's form of insanity."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Hammerlock3 said:

you don't think mess will win three? i don't think he ever loses again.

I'm saying he doesn't win a match.  😉

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Hammerlock3 said:

you don't think mess will win three? i don't think he ever loses again.

Im not the biggest MM fan but when I think about him losing to two sophomores, albeit elite sophomores at super 32 his senior year (Sealey and Ferrari). To then beating Levi to make the junior team 8 months later and then fast forward another 14-18 months being a junior world champ teching his way through the tournament and finishing his RS year in the big 10 with a 70% bonus rate at the toughest weight in the country, its scary to imagine how good hes going to be in the coming years.

  • Bob 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

I like this question when it's a bit more subjective and the question doesn't focus on who had the most NCAA titles, but who would actually was the "best" or "greatest" at their peak performance.

 

I'd go with:

125.  Spencer Lee

133. John Smith

141. Yianni (I wanted to put Gable here, but he lost at this weight...)

149. Dake

157.  Lee Kemp

165. Burroughs

174. Askren

184.  Cael

197. Aaron Brooks

285. Gable

 

Edited by billyhoyle
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd put Nolf over smith at 157.  He lost 2 matches in his career to Imar as a freshman and also pinned him.  He  Injury defaulted 2 matches his his junior year that was his 4 losses.  Nolf also wrestled 9 more matches and had a better win and bonus % than Smith. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Iwrite said:

No way to leave Dan Hodge off any such list. Never lost in college and never taken down his entire college career. Pinned over 73 percent of foes.  His junior year, Hodge won the NCAA title with four straight pins, the freestyle title with five pins and then entered the Greco-Roman nationals (his first ever try in that style) and won with four more pins. So, he won three national titles in less than a month's time with 13 straight pins. And his impact on the sport was such that to this day he remains (sadly) the only wrestler to ever appear on the cover of Sports Illustrated.

7

This is a good example of why you need to have a year cutoff, whether its the past 20, 30 or even 50 years.  Because you have all these old-timers who were great in their day, but who don't belong in a present-day conversation at all.  

The sport was just so different then, with dissimilar rules and techniques.  There was no weight training, and the college athletics experience was so different too.  Take Hodge:  he wrestled a *total* of 46 bouts in his whole college career, and didn't even *start* at Oklahoma until he was 22 or 23, after a Navy stint and after he'd already wrestled in an Olympics.  Can you name who his best opponent was?  No, you can't.

And every era had a Hodge.  Stories about about how diminutive Robin Reed could pin everyone on the Olympic Team, including the heavyweight.  Bill Koll, another undefeated-and-never-taken-down guy.  JB will come here and wax about Gray Simons. 

It goes without saying that if you teleport of these old-timers when they were at their peak to the present day, they'd get eaten alive.  But should that take away from the fact that, in their day, they were the best around?  I don't think so, but how are you going to compare Koll to Zain, Simons to Spencer, Hodge to Starocci, Reed to Stieber?  You can't.

So just leave them out. If it isn't apples to apples, don't compare.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, BAC said:

This is a good example of why you need to have a year cutoff, whether its the past 20, 30 or even 50 years.  Because you have all these old-timers who were great in their day, but who don't belong in a present-day conversation at all.  

The sport was just so different then, with dissimilar rules and techniques.  There was no weight training, and the college athletics experience was so different too.  Take Hodge:  he wrestled a *total* of 46 bouts in his whole college career, and didn't even *start* at Oklahoma until he was 22 or 23, after a Navy stint and after he'd already wrestled in an Olympics.  Can you name who his best opponent was?  No, you can't.

And every era had a Hodge.  Stories about about how diminutive Robin Reed could pin everyone on the Olympic Team, including the heavyweight.  Bill Koll, another undefeated-and-never-taken-down guy.  JB will come here and wax about Gray Simons. 

It goes without saying that if you teleport of these old-timers when they were at their peak to the present day, they'd get eaten alive.  But should that take away from the fact that, in their day, they were the best around?  I don't think so, but how are you going to compare Koll to Zain, Simons to Spencer, Hodge to Starocci, Reed to Stieber?  You can't.

So just leave them out. If it isn't apples to apples, don't compare.

What he could do to an apple with his hands should be enough to include him on the list. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, ionel said:

But did he ever wrestle D1 @ 184 or 197?

Nah bro.

OP was about best at each weight, wasn't it?  Even if the thread title was not.

"I know actually nothing.  It isn't even conjecture at this point." - me

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...