Stallcus Blaze

[russ1847]

2 minutes ago, Paul158 said:

Last year Ayala and Byrd were dead even 3to2 tie breaker. This year he also beat Ayala. So has Davino and 3 other wrestlers. With the exception of Forrest his competition has wrestled tougher higher ranked individuals and won. I don't believe winning last year means as much as what you are doing this year. Being undefeated doesn't mean a lot if you have a soft schedule. But it doesn't really matter. If he is that good it shouldn't matter where he is seeded in the tournament. Seedings and rankings are great, but you still have to wrestle and win. All I know whoever wins 133 is going to have to earn it. Great weight class. NCAA's will be even tougher especially if Forrest decides to wrestle.

Too bad Van Dee ducked Byrd on Friday.  Somehow was ok to wrestle 2 days later.

[RawDog]

41 minutes ago, Coastal said:

The issue is that 133 last year was one of the weakest weights in recent memory.  The returning AAs that have faced the incoming freshmen have been hammered and for most of them they aren't close.   Ayala is 9-6, Knox got pinned and majored, Fuggit, Van Dee... Romney and Davis moved up to 141 and McGonigale graduated.

There's a chance that none of the AAs at 133 in 2025 AA again.

 

1 hour ago, russ1847 said:

Sure there is.  Byrd is an undefeated returning national champion and the others are not.  The lack of respect for a guy who has won 29 in a row is crazy.  We will see if the different freshman can deal with constant forward pressure.

 

Byrd is a multiple time all american in brackets that included fix,rby, suriano and desanto.  Byrd is used to tough brackets.  Until someone beats him he is the top 133

[juniorvarsity]

5 hours ago, Caveira said:

You’re right but they did change the scoring rules to encourage action as the theory was more points = more incentive to score.  I knew it wouldn’t change anything.  Now we’re stuck with silly scoring rules that didn’t change anything. 

The 3 point TD was implemented because it is a more appropriate score differential between takedowns and escapes. It also rewards offensive wrestling. They did mention it would incentivize offenselive wrestling, but that's secondary and it is repeated over and over again by everyone. 

[Pinnacle]

Kerkvliet won an NCAA title and was unbeaten heading into Big10s last year and couldn't get the #1 seed and nobody thought he would win anyway. They felt there was someone better in the bracket, and turns out they were right. 

Byrd is in a similar position with the fans. The fans know or believe two things. One, Byrd won the bracket last year and is undefeated this year. Two, they believe there are better wrestlers in the bracket this year, guys Byrd has never beaten. Are the fans right again? Only time will tell.

[Caveira]

16 minutes ago, juniorvarsity said:

The 3 point TD was implemented because it is a more appropriate score differential between takedowns and escapes. It also rewards offensive wrestling. They did mention it would incentivize offenselive wrestling, but that's secondary and it is repeated over and over again by everyone. 

The three-point takedown had been a discussion piece in recent years but hadn’t generated much traction. But with national tournament match points down 19 percent since 2019 and takedowns down almost 17 percent during the same time frame, the rules committee made a three-pronged move to jumpstart action, risk-taking and scoring.

“It puts an emphasis on risk and we need more risk. If you look at the numbers statistically, takedowns have gone down, backpoints have gone down, tech falls have gone down. Everything has decreased in the last 10 years in our numbers, so we’ve got to figure out how to create more action, more points, more opportunities.” 

“We’re tired of watching boring wrestling for six minutes and me just laying on top of you to win 2-1. That’s not possible now. And we’re going to take that away. That was sort of the mindset. That stall ride, the hustle ride, I’m going to figure out how to hold on to get my minute and win 2-1, we want to eliminate that.” 

he does mention escapes but not how you did.   It didn’t do any of this.  It made it worse.  There is less physical scoring.  They are bad rule changes. 

[Caveira]

13 minutes ago, Pinnacle said:

Kerkvliet won an NCAA title and was unbeaten heading into Big10s last year and couldn't get the #1 seed and nobody thought he would win anyway. They felt there was someone better in the bracket, and turns out they were right. 

Byrd is in a similar position with the fans. The fans know or believe two things. One, Byrd won the bracket last year and is undefeated this year. Two, they believe there are better wrestlers in the bracket this year, guys Byrd has never beaten. Are the fans right again? Only time will tell.

The #2 big10 hwt in that bracket had 7 losses.  Not even comparable.  Rational fans give the defending undefeated ncaa champ the #1 seed hands down.  Only psu fans think otherwise because they don’t want a tough semi at bigs.   Also Kirk was not the ncaa champ the year before he lost to mason parris in the finals and I think at bigs.  Kerk had 3 losses the year before 

Edited February 17 by Caveira

[Paul158]

8 minutes ago, Caveira said:

The three-point takedown had been a discussion piece in recent years but hadn’t generated much traction. But with national tournament match points down 19 percent since 2019 and takedowns down almost 17 percent during the same time frame, the rules committee made a three-pronged move to jumpstart action, risk-taking and scoring.

“It puts an emphasis on risk and we need more risk. If you look at the numbers statistically, takedowns have gone down, backpoints have gone down, tech falls have gone down. Everything has decreased in the last 10 years in our numbers, so we’ve got to figure out how to create more action, more points, more opportunities.” 

“We’re tired of watching boring wrestling for six minutes and me just laying on top of you to win 2-1. That’s not possible now. And we’re going to take that away. That was sort of the mindset. That stall ride, the hustle ride, I’m going to figure out how to hold on to get my minute and win 2-1, we want to eliminate that.” 

he does mention escapes but not how you did.   It didn’t do any of this.  It made it worse.  There is less physical scoring.  They are bad rule changes. 

Implement cash bonuses for takedowns, back points and pins. tech falls and major decisions. I'm sure some member of the booster club has already thought of it. (and tried it)

Edited February 17 by Paul158
missed a word

[Caveira]

3 minutes ago, Coastal said:

Are you on drugs?  He's talking about just last season.   "Rational fans give the defending undefeated ncaa champ the #1 seed hands down" wasn't the case last season.  Steveson got the #1 seed at BIGs despite Kerkvliet having the same criteria.   

It's a moot point anyway since there's now a matrix in place for BIGs seeds.

Byrd was ncaa champ last year but he did lose 1.  Kirk lost 3 year before in your example and did not win NCAAs he lost to Paris in the finals 

Edited February 17 by Caveira

[Le duke]

The #2 big10 hwt in that bracket had 7 losses.  Not even comparable.  Rational fans give the defending undefeated ncaa champ the #1 seed hands down.  Only psu fans think otherwise because they don’t want a tough semi at bigs.   Also Kirk was not the ncaa champ the year before he lost to mason parris in the finals and I think at bigs.  Kerk had 3 losses the year before 

What in the world…?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Caveira]

2 minutes ago, Le duke said:

 

What in the world…?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Someone compared it to Kirk’s seeding at bigs as if it was the same.  It isn’t.   Kirk lost a lot the year before and didn’t even win NCAAs.  It’s just standard blue goggle logic.  

[Caveira]

5 minutes ago, Coastal said:

You've got your facts all screwed up.  In 2023, Kerkvliet lost to Parris, in 2024 he went undefeated and beat Davisdson to win the title.  In 2025 Kerkvliet was undefeated going into BIGs but was given the 2 seed.

And he lost in the finals at bigs and lost in the semis at NCAAs.  Did they get it right then?

[Le duke]

Someone compared it to Kirk’s seeding at bigs as if it was the same.  It isn’t.   Kirk lost a lot the year before and didn’t even win NCAAs.  It’s just standard blue goggle logic.  

In 2024 Greg Kerkvliet won NCAAs. He went undefeated that year. 20-0.

In 2025, he was undefeated heading into the B1G tournament. He got seeded 2nd. Lost in the final to Steveson. So, no, he didn’t have seven losses.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Caveira]

11 minutes ago, Coastal said:

You are the one arguing that an undefeated returning champ has to be the 1 seed.  You were shown that that is not always the case with a situation as recently as last year and now you want to change the subject.

Stevenson isn’t some freshmen With zero ncaa championships and zero big tourney experience.  At the time he was regarded as the best hwt literally ever.   Rules can’t be absolute.  Thats silly.   And they got it right.  Kerk lost at bigs to the #1 seed and Kerk lost twice at NCAAs.  Once in the semis once to Trephan in the third place bout 

Edited February 17 by Caveira

[ionel]

7 minutes ago, Caveira said:

Stevenson isn’t some true freshmen With zero ncaa championships.  

Actually he did have zero ncaa championships.  Lot of hype but never got a single one.  

[Caveira]

2 minutes ago, ionel said:

Actually he did have zero ncaa championships.  Lot of hype but never got a single one.  

Didn’t he win 2 and 1 second and 1 third?    And two Hodges and an oly gold?

Edited February 17 by Caveira

[ionel]

1 minute ago, Caveira said:

Didn’t he win 2 and 1 second ?    And two Hodges and an oly gold?

Nope none zero and no Hodges or gold.  Check the records.  

[Caveira]

Just now, ionel said:

Nope none zero and no Hodges or gold.  Check the records.  

Ok then  … blaze hasn’t won a single prestigious tourney In college yet.    
 

I bet he wins a few before he graduates though 

Edited February 17 by Caveira

[ionel]

1 minute ago, Caveira said:

Ok then  … blaze hasn’t won a single prestigious tourney In college yet.    
 

I bet he wins a few before he graduates though 

Blaze is a guy I've seen wrestle.  Never seen the guy you speak of, heard a lot of hype coming out of HS but don't think he ever stepped on the mat.  

[Caveira]

4 minutes ago, ionel said:

Blaze is a guy I've seen wrestle.  Never seen the guy you speak of, heard a lot of hype coming out of HS but don't think he ever stepped on the mat.  

Did I spell his name wrong or something ha 

Edited February 17 by Caveira

[ionel]

1 minute ago, Caveira said:

 

That's a completely different guy than you were posting about.  Might I suggest you go back and review your post sir. 

[Caveira]

1 minute ago, ionel said:

That's a completely different guy than you were posting about.  Might I suggest you go back and review your post sir. 

To much nuance.   Byrd deserves the #1 seed.  

[ionel]

Just now, Caveira said:

  Byrd deserves the #1 seed.  

I can agree.  

[Psalm 1 guy]

Some nuonced conversation in this thread, but if my thinking is corect, the truth will prevale in the end.  

[Pinnacle]

11 hours ago, Caveira said:

The #2 big10 hwt in that bracket had 7 losses.  Not even comparable.  Rational fans give the defending undefeated ncaa champ the #1 seed hands down.  Only psu fans think otherwise

because they don’t want a tough semi at bigs.   Also Kirk was not the ncaa champ the year before he lost to mason parris in the finals and I think at bigs.  Kerk had 3 losses the year before 

 

Wake up. You are in the wrong year. 

[Pinnacle]

10 hours ago, Caveira said:

Someone compared it to Kirk’s seeding at bigs as if it was the same.  It isn’t.   Kirk lost a lot the year before and didn’t even win NCAAs.  It’s just standard blue goggle logic.  

 

You are clueless.