Wrestleknownothing

In the Bloomberg article about Bob Nicols' business practices it was pretty clear that he relies heavily on lawyers and contract enforcement, especially when he has more resources than his counterparty. Given that, I cannot see him paying money without a contract in place. And if the contract is violated, I could definitely see him taking action. The main difference here is that bad PR probably has zero impact on his ability to find renters who will rent his properties, but going after a high profile wrestler could certainly negatively impact his ability to recruit other wrestlers.

Please tell me that is a Pixies reference.

How do you handicap Steveson's odds? Are you in the 100% certain camp? Or do you put him somewhere below 100%?

When you post or quote in the upper right is the GIF button

And if it was about money. So what? Pay the man. NCAA athletes have been underpaid historically.

I do not support any corruption. You seem to.

If you are against that, you must be against this too. Or do you not care because it is Trump?

I know intentional obtuseness is your brand, but it is a Herky Statue. One of 99. It was not commissioned for Spencer Lee. It is not a Spencer Lee statue.

It is non-specific enough at this point that I do not know what to think, but I am concerned. Sovereign wealth funds are funded with surpluses, which we do not have. But that is a minor point. The bigger point is that Trump is not afraid to use his position and power to personally enrich himself. Having a more direct way to do that worries me.

You do not know the difference between "in honor of" and "statue of"

I don't care one way or the other.

Except it wasn't a sale. It was a buy.

Yeah the resemblence is eerie.

and squat one too

The most sensible reply yet

How can you not see how that could be possible for him to think?

Forgot to include this one. The probability for 6-10 AAs for PSU over the last 6 weeks.

No, not Trump doubling down on whether it caused the DCA crash. But here is something you could do to have some fun. 1. Decide to open a casino 2. Offer 25% of the casino to women and people of color investors only 3. Hugely overprice the offering while claiming it will create generational wealth 4. Wait to be sued by anti-DEI advocates saying they are being unfairly denied the opportunity to invest 5. Settle with the anti-DEI advocates by allowing them to invest at the same (inflated) valuation as everyone else 6. Whistle all the way to the bank https://blockclubchicago.org/2025/01/31/white-men-are-suing-ballys-casino-city-over-investment-offer-aimed-at-women-minorities/

That's Mr. National Champion Scrub QB to you.

I clearly have no idea what I am doing.

This is an especially interesting dual given how close these two teams are in expected points at the NCAA tournament. They are both on the short list for the fourth, and final, podium spot.

Intermat's new rankings for the week just dropped. There are no real surprises at the top as we had #1 wrestle #2 this past week. The results of that dual meant there would be some separation this week. And there is. In addition to PSU solidifying its hold on the top spot, Iowa and Oklahoma State are looking pretty locked in for second and third. With their upcoming dual at the end of the month we will get a lot more information on that front soon enough. But the more interesting race (as it has been for years) is the race for the fourth and final podium spot. Nebraska, Minnesota, Ohio State, Virginia Tech, and Northern Iowa all have realistic shots. Meanwhile, earlier candidates Cornell and Illinois have faded from the picture. On the AA front, just because a wrestler is ranked in the top 8 does not mean they will finish in the top 8. When it comes to seeds (first cousin of ranks) a 9 seed and an 8 seed have very similar chances of AAing. Of course PSU leads the pack with 8.3 expected AAs. They also improved their chances of 10 AAs to 11.75%, a season (and probably all-time) high.

Good point. Hey @Husker_Du, I read The Athletic a lot. They do a lot of re-ranking articles where they revisit old rankings. Today they have an article re-ranking the 2022 college QB class, for example. Would you re-rank any of the classes listed above? If so, which? And how?

The assumption in these arguments is that the recruiting class rankers got it right and the coaches either lived up to the rank or not. There is always the possibility the recruiting class ranks were wrong. Looking at 2013 ranks certainly offers support for that view.

I am curious about all those things too