Jason Bryant

Carlton Haselrig - 7 times.
 

Is he still around? I thought someone posted an obit on the old board but maybe I'm thinking of a different person

I was very excited about this. As I was assembling a summary of my interpretation of what has happened with Signal in security terms. Halfway through, I realized that whatever I posted - however good or bad - was going to be met with the same kind of garbage I was stormed with in the last dozen or so posts. Likely joined by a dozen or so other posters who like to pile on like a bunch of jackals.
My cooler, calmer head prevailed. Better for me to keep my personal interests separate from this place.
Doesn't matter.
In the end, the message is simple. US Military should use military secure channels, period. Anything else is high risk. Anyone who doesn't follow this should be sacked.

Way too much Kidz Bop (which is effing terrible)

Gorriaran (had to look up that spelling) Award goes to Cam Steed he had 3 pinfalls in 7:00 to Hendrickson's 3 pinfalls in 8:25
No one else had more than two.

... even NJ Dan 

It’s also a timing thing. Set up for finals with the stage and mat was completed just before doors opened.

Session 5 was changed to this format last year. We did it this way last week in Providence for D3 as well.

Didn’t have anything to do with 47.

When you print on Track, select the IMG template

Tie was Greenlee at the All-Star. Other loss might have been Hall too … talked to Pecora back in June before he passed and he had it in front of him. I think I wrote it down somewhere.

6 hours ago, nighthawk21 said:

They did set the record again at 209 points

That's incorrect. The record is 234.5 set in 2017. 

They tied their own NAIA record with 7 finalists and tied the NAIA record for most champs (6) in a season, tying the 1981 Central Oklahoma (then known as Central State) squad. 

On 3/6/2025 at 11:33 AM, PortaJohn said:

Schools in Lehigh's conference (CAA) that I believe are good geographical fits for wrestling; Villanova, University of Delaware, & Albany.  Hard to imagine either of the Boston schools picking it up.  Would realignment be better for Edinboro, Lock Haven, Bloomsburg, & Rider to join the EIWA? 

Also, Temple and Syracuse should resurrect their programs. 

Lehigh's in the Patriot League, not the CAA. 

Over/under on fans attending 6 team Ivy League tounament is 84

It appears that all other teams have at least 1 loss.  Has this ever happened before?

It sucks

Poor TJ Williams.  So close...

1 hour ago, PortaJohn said:

Lol.  I don't know if anyone actually knows the answer to that question.  Will have to defer to @Husker_Du @Jon_Kozak @SetonHallPirate or @Jason Bryant

Rei Higuchi Thread 2.0

I get it, you don’t like the terminology, just like I don’t like the archaic, redundant and misapplied term pinfall.

Cheers

4 minutes ago, ionel said:

We all know this and they didn't, doesn't mean it was the major chance.  We could go with point scoring instead. 

Which Points?
The advent of points vs. a fall & time advantage?
Team Scoring Changes? 
Match Points? 
Advent of the superior decision?
Removal of the SD and advent of the major and technical fall?
advent of overtime in dual meets?
advent of criteria in team scoring events with dual advancement? 
advent of criteria in regular season duals?
return of ties in duals?
return of criteria in regular season duals?
First takedown is 2 points, then all of them 1 point?
Back to all takedowns being 2 points?
Falls being 3 seconds? 
Falls being 2 seconds? 
Falls being 1 second?

You see the issue with selecting an era based on a scoring rule? There's just too many. 

A scoring rule change didn't change the number of athletes who could or couldn't compete en masse and how many years they can compete like the FR eligibility did - Divisional Era is probably the most logical, since it set into motion what we have today.

I'm not saying it's THE solution, but given the structure and history of the sport, the two above options make more sense to set clear eras apart from one another. 

21 minutes ago, ionel said:

It simply a made up distinction by a small group.  After 69 most still only wrestled So - Sr years. So many others era changes after.  

After 1969, freshman COULD wrestle, whereas before, there were rules against it. Pretty clear line of demarcation in regards to historical significance. No other changes, as of this moment, impacted eligibility and the sport's records like that change did. The exceptions are the 1947 year of freshman eligibility and the additional COVID year. 

The fact coaches became the arbiter of who wrestled when is immaterial - they were not allowed prior, making it a logical place to separate eras - the three-year era and the four-year era. Not sure why it's so bothersome. 
 

One other separator could simply be 1973-74 - the Divisional era, where the NCAA went to three divisions. 

1 hour ago, ionel said:

I remember 1969.  Most folks had a single rotary dial phone in their house and the party line system was still in use.  Some establishments still had outhouses, maybe that hasn't changed much cause now we have @PortaJohns. Sure the 69 Pontiac GTO was one of the coolest cars ever but it ain't worth $300k today because its modern.  Pat Smith brought in a newer "modern" era showing you could win 4x even as a true freshman.  However, the 4x thing didn't really take off until Cael showed the way.  It was rare even then for true freshman to start, most just didn't have the defensive skills out of high school and needed a year in the room.  The next new modern came after high school and club coaching improved so much that these kids had the defense and technique right out of high school or before.  I'd say there was another new modern when Cael started coaching.

No one is saying 1969 is the "modern era."  We simply have one long history of wrestling with a lot of changes throughout.  

It's the era of four-year eligibility, that's the determining factor between wrestling before and wrestling after - save the one instance of 1947. 

Statistically, everything before then is different. Hence, why those of us who spend heavy time researching and archiving things that have never been properly chronicled have tended to look at it. Is the term "modern era" incorrect? It might be. Maybe it's the "four-year-eligibility era" but that's too annoying to write repeatedly. 

MLB's modern era is considered anything after 1901. MLB even designates some differences in stats from when they lowered the mound and the advent of the DH. I'm not saying its universally accepted or will be universally accepted, but that is the one clear line in the sport that separates the stats of old from the stats of today. 

43 minutes ago, SocraTease said:

Penn State had a 60 match win streak, I think, before losing to Iowa and beginning their present 70 match win streak. 

130-1 over the last decade.  Insane.   A 99.2 percent winning percentage. They are creeping up on the reliability of death and taxes.

They lost to Arizona State and Iowa in that span. 

Klingman, myself and a couple of the other wrestling historian types have tended to define the "modern era of college wrestling" to be full freshman eligibility (save the outlier '47 season), so from 1969 on. It's basically the era of "four time" anything ... 

1 hour ago, Wrestleknownothing said:

Nice. Thank you.

It is interesting that when I googled it, the first NWCA article in the search results was the older version without the clarification.

I made the clarification on the older post (From last year) after you posted it here. I figured it would make sense and go back to update the original post you linked to, so past references would be accurate.