PSULou64

With MM returning and probably staying at 165, does anyone transfer to a place where they expect you go up to 165 and use your last year of eligibility? RS I can see but other than that I doubt it.

We will always have controversy to any extent where there are judgement calls made. It's unavoidable. The question remains of how many of us think there need to be changes made or tightening of already in place rules as opposed to how many are happy with the current state of things. We all have different opinions on that and I do believe that maybe these lines are more closely based on generation and where you grew up wrestling more than anything else. I can say that 1-1 matches going into double overtime isn't what I want to watch and I'm of the opinion that there are a lot of wrestlers who are looking to get to ride outs to win. You may disagree and that's fine but I also believe that if you want to pick up a larger fan base and grow the sport, the on the mat offense has to be there.

I think offensively, from the neutral position, we have allowed scramblers too much reward vs lack of risk initiated offensive output. We can't have it both ways as fans. You can't ask one wrestler to be the aggressor and attack if the other wrestler will most of the time be rewarded with a stalemate or defensive takedown. If you like guys who scramble as their sole means of offensive production and champion that kind of wrestling, you can't be surprised or complain with what we get in a lot of matches. As far as top wrestling goes, there are way too many riders who initiate no attempt to breakdown or turn. They react to the bottom wrestler, which is much easier especially if your goal is to ride and never initiate offense. I would propose that after 1 minute and no offensive points the wrestlers are put into neutral position but no point is given to the defensive wrestler. He's the rub, you only get the riding point of you have scored offensive points during the match and still have a minute of riding time advantage.

We can all spin and make it appear to favor our opinions. My opinion is that Manning took over a very good program and for the most part has been consistently good, probably a bit better as well but he's only in the last two years, when also taking from the portal, led Nebraska to elite level.i also think his assistant coaches have more to do with this than he does. The built not bought rhetoric is about 80% true and 20% b.s. He wasn't nearly as consistent in the first half of his tenure, and hasn't always been in the Big Ten either. He's a good coach, I don't care for him personally but to make it seem like he's done something amazing there is just not true.

23 years (2001-2024) not including 2020 postseason 5 NC (.23 average per year) 77 - AA (inherited 4) 8 from 2020* so 69 (3.14 average AA per year) Best ncaa finish 4th (average finish 7.38) Top ten ncaa finishes 13 (59%) 1 conference championship 294 -107-3 (.73 win percentage) 2 losing seasons (8.7 percent) 15 seasons 1985-2000 4 NC (.27 average per year) 40 - AA (inherited 1) (2.67 AA average per year Best ncaa finish 3rd (average finish 6.17) Top ten ncaa finishes 6 (40%) 2 conference championships 199-77-6 (win percentage .71) 1 losing season (6.7 percent) Here is the reality, Neumann is better in four of the categories, Manning in 3 when looked at per year.

When you compare numbers from the first 23, not including the last two years, to the 15 of Neumann, I just don't see much to support that claim. They are very similar on a per year comparison.

Manning has been there for twenty five years. Prior to NIL and the the craziness across the nation in the past two years, also Nebraska's best seasons in those 25 years (ncaa tournament wise) the program was very good. The truth is he inherited a very good program and for 23 years he kept it very good. The last two have been elite level but they have bought, like everyone else, to attain that. I have no problem there but to claim they built it and they are doing it differently is just not true. I just don't understand the hype around him based upon his total tenure there.

I never said he didn't do anything. He's had 25 years and if you consider the success over time from that of what was already being done, he's kept a pretty good program, pretty good.

How exactly did he build this from the ground up in a different way than any other coach who takes over another program? By all accounts if you look at their record over time, conference champions, conference championships, ncaa top ten team finishes, all Americans and national champions from the Tim Neumann era; Manning really hasn't done anything that wasn't being done before he became head coach.

A couple of weeks ago Askren had an interesting take on lack of offense but didn't really offer solutions. I don't really have a problem with guys pushing forward and looking for re attack angles, it's not the most exciting style but generally those guys are pushing the pace and will get in and score at some point on all but a few elite guys. For me it's the defense only guys who generally back up the entire time and only have scramble offense. Vega fits this description pretty well. Yes they will attack on their own against mid and low tier guys but against the top guys they will not. This makes for matches where a normally aggressive wrestler won't shoot and the other who won't have anything to counter. The question is where do we go from here? Maybe quicker stalemate calls, like the five count riding the ankle on top, but when guys are locked through the crotch and trying to turn the corner? If you want guys to take more of the offensive risk you have to make it worth their effort to do so.

I didn't badmouth, I questioned why it's alright to badmouth the wrestlers who go to PSU for their reasons for choosing to go there, but no one questions the okst. Wrestlers reasons and never brings up money as a possible reason where they always make that a point, usually a main point, as why psu gets guys. None of us know how the PSU program money works but you all are sure they are throwing money at guys like no other program. Conjecture isn't proof. And stating that paying the most decorated college coach, who has proven himself, the same as an unproven never coached before guy the same amount is ridiculous isn't badmouthing, it's true. Plus they may make the same in the end but the fact that 2/3 of what Cael makes is bonus driven, results based, and 90% of what DT makes is given to him no matter what makes a big difference.

I can tell by your short stint here that you have not been privy to all of the outrageous claims posted by psu haters and the outright garbage some people spew. If you go through just the last few months of comments you'll see how biased, with lack of anything remotely resembling proof, people put out there.

So DT makes a much higher base salary and it is not heavily conditional on performance bonuses (just over 1 million base and he should clear at least another $110k for bonuses). Cael's base salary is around $315k with about $650k earned in performance bonuses. And comparing a youth clubs success to a d1 programs success is laughable especially with an if the PSU support he had while doing that. PSU has 1.4 million that they split out in the program as they see fit although the wrestlers can make additional deals on their own. Based upon that alone there isn't the kind of money available that suggests the have the deepest pockets available especially when guys from PSU and guys who have gone other places said they got higher offers, in some case double that, of what PSU was offering. Just because CStar wrote something doesn't 1. make it true or 2. mean he wasn't just having fun with the fact that it was conjecture and wanted to make create more intrigue. And lastly we are to completely believe the wrestlers who give their reasons for going to okst. As completely unmotivated by money but completely disregard the PSU wrestlers who say the same reasons for going to PSU? Sounds completely unbiased to me.

I am wondering why everyone chalks up all the top prospects to PSU because they have "bags of money" to throw at guys even though that's just pure conjecture meanwhile DT's success at bringing guys in and flipping previously committed guys to okst. is because of his allure, coaching style, etc. and has nothing to do with with the fact that they have the deepest pockets of all programs? Based on his ridiculous salary alone for an unproven coaching commodity I would say their had to be at least a little something there regarding what they are shelling out for these guys.

He wants to be a national champion, not "survive" the season. Maybe moving up to 141 would suit him better and a place that knows how to keep guys healthy, at least as best possible, for the post season. I think Iowa would be out of contention based on that.