Leaderboard

Byrd up 3-0 with about a minute of RT after the first period. Byrd starts down in the 2nd, flaps his wings into a standing position, Moore holds on too long and gets the stall. Moore chips away at riding time (down to 33 in favor of Byrd) by concedes the escape. Byrd gets his worm with another takedown with one second left in the second. 7-0 Byrd after 2 with one stall against Moore. 3rd period starts with Moore on bottom. Byrd applies forward pressure and spiral ride, gets a bit over aggressive, and Moore slickly reverses him. Cartwheel by Byrd on bottom and he re-reverses. Then allows Moore to escape. Grabs another three for himself, shoves Moore out of bounds, and earns a stalling point. Byrd's pushing for a tech here. Goes for a low single, shelves it, gets around Moore's Funk. 17-4 with riding time. Byrd proudly goes back to his nest.

I hope this becomes adopted by as many as possible going forward. especially for youth

I think Hamiti beats that version of KO.

The Bird ... who saw that major coming?

Also check https://fightingillini.com/sports/wrestling/schedule/2024-25 for live stat link.

Walker 13-1 rode the crap out of him.

So you agree with me. Very interesting. The indictment, which is the charges, do not specifically state what the actual charges are. Trump is entitled by the Constitution to know what he is being charged with so he can mount a defense. Why do you use jury instructions which is after the fact. So you are in effect saying the charges were not known until jury instructions. Sounds like a pre-determined result. It was a faux prosecution and the appeal will show this. Now why did the indictment not state exactly what law was he breaking specifically? Why term it as "another law"? You have to break a law to be prosecuted for it. You and Bragg are not able to enumerate that. Another wrinkle: How could he conceal anything when the records were made after the election? Do you ever defend a client without knowing exactly what he/she did to break the law? If so, did you not seek dismissal based on the 6th Amendment? Quoted here: Amendment VI (1791) In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the state and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the assistance of counsel for his defense. mspart

2019 Freshman 2020 Let's not talk about it 2021 Free year 2022 Junior 2023 Finding himself redshirt (it is there, but you have to read between the lines) 2024 Oh yeah, I am "trying" out for the Olympics redshirt. I can still do that after the fact, right? Then, yeah. 2025 My first love has always, been will always be, WWE, NFL, MMA, interpretive dance, NCAA wrestling.

Tony Rotundo Earl Smith View full article

Meaty oker at best..

This isn't the most gifted group...

125. R Attaboy or other v. Noah Surtin. I'm surtin this goes Mizzou IL-0; MO-3. 133. The Byrd v. Kaden Moore. Bird by major IL-4; MO-3. 141. Puciknow v. Josh Edmond. We don't know for sure but IL-7; MO-3. 149. The Dictionary v. Logan Gioffre. A major definition. IL-11; MO-3. 157. Kraisser the Rob Rohn v. James Conway. He might be down early but will pull it out. IL-14; MO-3. 165. Scoles v. Cam Steed. Gotta be Scoles. IL-17; MO-3 174. Brawny1 v. Keegan The Tool. Ok Mizzu has to win something and prob major. IL-17; MO-7. 184. The Destroyer of Worlds v. Colton Hawks. Is there any doubt. IL-20; MO-7. 197. Brawny2 v. Aeoden Sinclair. By major. IL-24; MO-7. 285. Big Luffman v. Seth Nitzel. Big L. IL-27; MO-7.

Hmmm. 82 votes so far. Someone didn't follow instructions.

You tell me brother. The hysteria is 70-100+ years old. One day they’ll get a prediction right. Right? Maybe. ill ask u a direct question. If we invest 1 trillion dollars in us tax payer money. By some arbitrary year. Let’s call it 2034…. How much impact will it have on the climate. What if it was 2 trillion. Or 10. Or 100?

Coaches Popolizio and Espo wrestled for Oklahoma State. The cowboys know how to shrink 'em!

Too much PSU content on these boards (said the PSU fan), so screw those guys. This is about:

125. Ramazan Attasauov v. Noah Surtin. To paraphrase what Hiram Roth said to Michael Corleone: If Ramazan shows up at weight, I know we have a 125 pounder. If he doesn't, I know we don't. I expect Riley against Walker based on what the coaches have said. The ILLINI are 0-3 in duals at this weight. File under people grow differently: Caelan Riley beat Missouri's 165er Cameron Steed in the 17u Nationals five years ago at 106 pounds. ILL-0; MIZZ-3. 133. Lucas Byrd v. Kaden Moore. The Tiger is a tough kid, but he medical forfeited his last match at the Tiger Style Invite, then lost to UNC's McGonagle 0-3. Lucas gets the train started, as the ILLINI need to win these lower weights. ILL-3; MIZZ-3. 141. Danny Pucino v. Josh Edmond. My Upset Special! Edmond won 10-5 in last year's dual, but Pucino is trending up, while Edmond is trending down. ILL-6; MIZZ-3. 149. Kannon Webster v. Logan Gioffre. What was a pretty close match last season is now a major decision or close to it. ILL-9; MIZZ-3. 157. Jason Kraisser v. James Conway. The Tiger is 0-7 in duals. Make that 0-8. ILL-12; MIZZ-3. 165. Braeden Scoles v. Cam Steed. To me, this is the most intriguing match in the dual. Both are undefeated big-boarder 4x state champion prospects. Scoles is 6-0 and 100% bonus. Steed is 5-0 with 80% bonus. ILL-15; MIZZ-3 174. Danny Braunagel v. Keegan The Tool. I call him "The Tool" because everybody can't like Keegan. That's un-American! Anyway, very close match two years ago at the Tiger Style Invite until late in the third period when Keegan got the pinfall. ILL-15; MIZZ-7. 184. Edmond Ruth v. Colton Hawks. This could be the most exciting match of the dual. Ruth is majoring in Film and loves drama. He's 10-2 in overtime matches in his career. Hawks can shoot from distance but also likes to tie up. Will he tie up with Ruth? Going with clutch Edmond to win. ILL-18; MIZZ-7. 197. Zac Braunagel v. Aeoden Sinclair. This was going to be the headline match but Rocky Elam is reportedly a no show. He didn't wrestle until December last year. Sinclair is another blue chipper, but Zac won Fargo and Pan Ams and all those state championships, too. Plus, he's a handfighting legend. ILL-21; MIZZ-7. 285. Luke Luffman v. Seth Nitzel. I see Nitzel as a smaller version of Zach Elam or Lucas Davison. I think Luuuuke has speed, weight, agility, flexibility and experience advantages. Nitzel may be stronger, but he'll have to prove that on the mat. ILL-24; MIZZ-7. Missouri has real chances to win at 141 (where they're the paper favorite), 165 and 184. If the Tigers win all three, that would make it MIZZ-16, ILL-15. Wrestlestat.com has the Tigers winning 19-13, but that includes Rocky Elam wrestling and Seth Nitzel beating Luke Luffman. On December 7, we are more likely to see the full ILLINI and Missouri lineups at the Cougar Clash. Less than 100 tickets remain for this Dinner/Entertainment/Wrestling event.

Like last year the race for second, third, and fourth looks very tight. And very volatile. Based on current Intermat rankings I have it as Iowa, Nebraska, and Oklahoma State with Minnesota just missing out (by 0.1). Last year based on seeds, NC State was the prohibitive favorite to run away with second place. Instead they had the worst tournament of any team and wound up tied for 11th. Meanwhile, Cornell looked to be in a dogfight with Lehigh for the last podium spot. Cornell outperformed and finished 2nd, while Lehigh had the second worst tournament and finished 15th. So who ya got? Pick three.

... but the match is in Champaign so who knows?

That's a net positive. Urbana isn't exactly known for it's fine champagne...

My prediction: This match will be "in tents".

Love Roark. Coached him some over the years. Good friends with his older brother Will. Brady is a great kid. Excited about his future.

125: Walker/Surtin fall over Riley. 6-0 133: Byrd maj dec. Moore. 6-4 141: Pucino dec. Edmond. 7-6 149: Webster maj dec. Gioffre. 11-6 157: Kraisser fall over Conway. 17-6 165: Steed maj dec. Scoles. 17-10 174: KOT maj dec. Braunagel. 17-14 184: Hawks dec. Ruth 17-17 197: Braunagel maj dec. 21-17 285: Luffman dec. Nitzel 24-17

Roark is going to slot in very nicely for TJ after this season for my Jackrabbits.

I think Elam will be used very judiciously this year. He is very tall and I would think has a problem staying down at 197. I've stood next to him and would say he's over 6'4". I was a little suprised he didn't move up to heavyweight this year. He might have moved if he would had a magical redshirt year left to gain good weight this year and wrestle heavy next year. I'm just speculating though, I have no inside information.

A 5'10 240 pound TE seems viable in the NFL...

I don't see Byrd getting a major over Kade Moore. I am not a fan of Byrd's style, just my tastes. I don't think Moore has been the same since he got stabbed. Byrd looks good since his injury and will probably beat Moore. I hope it is close.

He plans on playing tight end for The Ohio State University with hopes to play for Jerra Jones in Dallas Seems fair since he was a pro basketball player and not football. Now he can be insufferable in two sports.

She played 4 full seasons at UConn, in at least 33 games each season. She's out of eligibility.

He doesn't. He's under 35% BP scorer...LIFETIME.

Shhh don't say that in front of the Penn State crowd.

No, she doesn't.

Anyone have any idea when Surtin and Elam will return to the lineup?

hes wrestling

yes

its gonna be really annoying when cal baptist takes the title....

The early post was an honest mistake. Blaming everyone on the internet for magnifying it was not.

Try again. So you got nothing.

Redding has beat: Aaron Nagao Wyatt Henson Mosha Schwartz Ethan Fernandez Kyle Biscoglia Taylor LaMont Domenic Zaccone Kellyn March Cody Phippen Block's best win was 5-4 over Nash Singleton

He hasn't wrestled yet this season with Herrera getting the nod in Navy and Stanford duals. With some of the guys who have been around for a few years, I've noticed there will be a second semester contingent that is not yet eligible for whatever reason

….. which one of these scientists are right in your opinion @red viking Is the world gonna end in the 60s or 70s or 80s or 2600s? is it getting hotter or colder? ……… August 10, 1969, in the New York Times: “We must realize that unless we are extremely lucky, everybody will disappear in a cloud of blue steam in 20 years.” April 1970, in Mademoiselle: “Population will inevitably and completely outstrip whatever small increases in food supplies we make. The death rate will increase until at least 100-200 million people per year will be starving to death during the next ten years.” Harvard biologist and Nobel Prize winner George Wald, speaking at the University of Rhode Island in November 1970: “Civilization will end within 15 or 30 years unless immediate action is taken against problems facing mankind.” Dennis Hayes, key organizer of Earth Day, in The Living Wilderness, Spring 1970: “It is already too late to avoid mass starvation.” In 1970, as greenhouse theorists pushed a rise in average temperature, plenty of prognosticators asserted a big freeze. Kenneth Watt sounded the ice alarm, speaking in Pennsylvania at Swarthmore College: “The world has been chilling sharply for about twenty years. If present trends continue, the world will be about four degrees colder for the global mean temperature in 1990, but 11 degrees colder in the year 2000. This is about twice what it would take to put us into an ice age.” Also in 1970, the Boston Globe ran with a chilling headline, “Scientist Predicts A New Ice Age By 21stCentury.” In the associated article, researcher James Lodge warned, “Air pollution may obliterate the sun and cause a new ice age in the first third of the next century if population continues to grow and earth’s resources are consumed at the present rate…” The Guardian, Jan. 29, 1974, echoed the Globe: “Spy Satellites Show New Ice Age is Coming Fast.” Time joined the cooling trend June 22, 1974: “Telltale signs are everywhere, from the unexpected persistence and thickness of pack ice in the waters around Iceland to the southward migration of a warmth-loving creature like the armadillo from the Midwest. Since the 1940s the mean global temperature has dropped about 2.7 F.” Newsweek weighed in on April 28, 1975, warning that global cooling would significantly impact agriculture. “There are ominous signs that the Earth’s weather patterns have begun to change dramatically and that these changes may portend a drastic decline in food production…” “The central fact is that after three quarters of a century of extraordinarily mild conditions, the Earth’s climate seems to be cooling down,” the Newsweekarticle continued. “Meteorologists disagree about the cause and extent of the cooling trend, as well as over its specific impact on local weather conditions. But they are almost unanimous in the view that the trend will reduce agricultural productivity for the rest of the century. If the climatic change is as profound as some of the pessimists fear, the resulting famines could be catastrophic.” Following Newsweek, the New York Times piped in on July 18, 1976, with additional gloom on agriculture’s demise attributed to global cooling. “… the news for the future is not all good. The climate is going to get unreliable. It is going to get cold. Harvest failures and regional famines will be more frequent. Weather will probably make history—again.” “The relationship of global climate to food supplies is a case in point: climatic researchers are becoming alarmed that in the next 10 to 100 years humanity will be unable to feed itself—not through technological insufficiency or political mischief—but because of climatic changes that it can barely understand or control.” Even in 1978, global cooling was a “No End” fact, according to another New York Times article: “An international team of specialists has concluded from eight indexes of climate that there is no end in sight to the cooling trend of the last 30 years, at least in the Northern Hemisphere.” However, just a year after the global cooling article, the New York Times predicted catastrophe via global warming in a February 1979 story: “Climatologists Are Warned North Pole Might Melt,” featuring a jarring opening paragraph: “There is a real possibility that some people now in their infancy will live to a time when the ice at the North Pole will have melted, a change that would cause swift and perhaps catastrophic changes in climate.” It was the end of the 1970s and big cold failed to arrive. Bring on big heat. Acid rain concerns kicked off the 1980s, but generally were replaced late in the decade with a flood of headlines on heat, greenhouse effect, and sea levels. In 1982, Mostafa Tolba, executive director of the UN’s Environment Program, pointed to the possibility of widespread devastation in less than 20 years. He cited “an environmental catastrophe which will witness devastation as complete, as irreversible as any nuclear holocaust.” On June 30, 1989, the Associated Press squeezed decimation into a tight, 11-year window, with an ominous article, “Rising Seas Could Obliterate Nations,” containing a jaw-dropping opener: “A senior UN environmental official (Noel Brown) says entire nations could be wiped off the face of the Earth by rising sea levels if the global warming trend is not reversed by the year 2000.” In 1990, aware the apocalypse was stalled, Mostafa Tolba, doubled down: “We shall win or lose the climate struggle in the first years of the 1990s. The issue is as urgent as that.” In February 1993, Thomas Lovejoy, assistant secretary for Environmental and External Affairs at the Smithsonian Institution, stressed the world had one remaining decade of opportunity to avoid calamity. “I am utterly convinced that most of the great environmental struggles will be either won or lost in the 1990s and by the next century it will be too late.” The 1990s was a steady chain of doomsday assurances, but the heaviest hyperbole was yet to be unleashed. In 2006, former vice-president Al Gore projected that unless drastic measures were implemented, the planet would hit an irreversible “point of no return” by 2016. Game over. Rajendra Pachauri, head of the UN Climate Panel, one-upped Gore in 2007, insisting 2012 was the year of irreversibility. “If there is no action before 2012, that’s too late. What we do in the next two to three years will determine our future. This is the defining moment.” In April 2008, media mogul Ted Turner provided far more detail than either Gore or Pachauri, emphasizing the consequences of climate inaction. “Not doing it will be catastrophic. We’ll be eight degrees hotter in ten, not 10 but 30 or 40 years and basically none of the crops will grow. Most of the people will have died and the rest of us will be cannibals. Civilization will have broken down. The few people left will be living in a failed state like Somalia or Sudan, and living conditions will be intolerable. The droughts will be so bad there’ll be no more corn growing.” The acclaimed godfather of global warming, James Hansen, drew a line in the sand testifying before Congress in June 2008, on the dangers of greenhouse gases: “We’re toast if we don’t get on a very different path. This is the last chance.” A year later, in July 2009, then-Prince Charles chimed in, asserting the planet had 96 months to avoid decimation: “…irretrievable climate and ecosystem collapse, and all that goes with it.” Only three months later, UK prime minister Gordon Brown urged nations to pull a historical handbrake ahead of a climate conference: “There are now fewer than 50 days to set the course of the next 50 years and more. If we do not reach a deal at this time, let us be in no doubt: once the damage from unchecked emissions growth is done, no retrospective global agreement, in some future period, can undo that choice. By then, it will be irretrievably too late.” In 2014, French foreign minister Laurent Fabius upped Brown’s 50 days to 500. “We have 500 days to avoid climate chaos.” Twelve years to 2031. In January 2019, Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez put her chips on 2031 as the potential end of days. “Millennials and people, you know, Gen Z and all these folks that will come after us are looking up and we’re like: ‘The world is gonna end in 12 years if we don’t address climate change and your biggest issue is how are we gonna pay for it? And, like, this is the war—this is our World War ll.” Eleven years to 2030. Echoing Ocasio-Cortez in March 2019, but shaving off a year, UN General Assembly President Maria Garces declared an 11-year window to escape catastrophe: “We are the last generation that can prevent irreparable damage to our planet.” In June 2019, then-presidential candidate Joe Biden threw his support behind Ocasio-Cortez’s dozen-year projection: “Science tells us that how we act or fail to act in the next 12 years will determine the very livability of our planet.” Full circle back to 2023, and the UN’s latest “time-bomb,” released March 20, as described by the Associated Press: “Humanity still has a chance close to the last to prevent the worst of climate change’s future harms…” In step with near annual UN declarations from the past 50 years, Secretary-General Guterresonce again sounded the alarm: “The climate time-bomb is ticking.”

I hope he's wrestling this weekend. If so it will make for a fun weekend for Spratley. (Spratley's got Volk on Friday night and Fig on Sunday afternoon). And from what I hear in room, Spratley whether win or loose he's wants to wrestle everyone in the room. He's not afraid of anyone.

I have a bit differently 125- Walker over Riley MIZZ-3 ILL-0 133- Byrd Major over Moore ILL-4 MIZZ-3 141- Edmond Over Pucino (Remember his two loses are against a National Champ and 2x AA) Mizz-6 ILL-4 149- Webster over Gioffre Ill-7 MIZZ-6 157- Kraisser over Conway ILL-10 MIZZ-6 (But i think this is a toss up. Conway continues to have brutal schedule. He has beaten people Kraisser has lost to in the past. I would not be surprised if Conway won) 165- Steed over Scoles ILL-10 MIZZ-9 (This is also a toss up) 174- O'Toole Major over Dan Braunagel MIZZ-13 ILL-10 184- Hawks over Ruth MIZZ-16 ILL-10 197- Zach Braunagel over Sinclair MIZZ-16 ILL-13 285- Luffman over Nitzel MIZZ-16 ILL-16 It will come down to criteria. But because Byrd racks up Points I think Illinois wins on criteria.

I thought she was the boarder czar. Or not. Or yes. Or not. Or yes. Or kakle

Didn't even the global warming folks debunk global warming hence why we have climate change?

125: Terukina dec Peterson 3-0 133: Frost dec Ayala 6-0 141: Block dec Redding 6-3 149: Echemendia dec Parco 9-3 157: Teemer dec Johnson 9-6 165: Caliendo tech Euton 9-11 174: Brands dec Riggins 9-14 184: Arnold dec Bockman 9-17 197: Carroll dec Buchanan 12-17 285: Bastida dec Kueter 15-17 Bastida will need a pin to win the dual but he wont get it. Hawkeyes win 15-17

125: Terukina dec Peterson 3-0 133: Frost dec Ayala 6-0 141: Redding dec Bloc 9-0 149: Parco dec Echemendia 9-3 157: Teemer dec Johnson 9-6 165: Caliendo major Euton 9-10 174: Kennedy dec Riggins 9-13 184: Arnold dec Bockman 9-16 197: Buchanan dec Carroll 9-19 285: Bastida dec Kueter 12-19 Hawkeyes

Thanks for your obviously non-biased input like always.

Arizona State?