98lberEating2Lunches

Yes, one who posts to get a reaction rather than to add value to a discussion. At least I didn't refer to you as a Russian Turd Poster, so there's that. And to be fair, you weren't the first to bring up Andrew Long.

Funny, it sure looked like you asked "What place did he finish and who/what seed did he lose to?" as a troll who already knows the answers might ask. To answer your clarified question, I would hope being seeded number #2 would not have an effect to one who loses to the #1 seed. But I suppose if we want to engage the hypothetical: 1) It could be the #2 vs #3 match was tougher than the #1 vs #4 match might've otherwise been for Mark Hall. 2) It could be if the eventual champ and #1 seed had been seeded #2, that stylistic match-up closer to weigh-ins against the #3 seed might've prevented him from making the finals. After all, he had lost to Mark Hall in the semifinals the prior year.

I responded to a request for clarification. For all I know, Cael knows the Coaches' ranking considered the all star result, because he, himself, considered it, and proposed seeding Mark Hall #2. I am certain that I didn't assert the seeding as being incorrect.

Understood. We can only live in the moment with some expectation to act after considering the best available information.

How much does the 2kg weight allowance factor into an athlete's decision whether to compete (in consideration of their broader training/lifestyle approach)? I suppose it could factor in.

Is that the date for the next Stalemates Street League?

I understand Cael's current position is that any participant should treat it like any other competition by assuming it will be considered by Coaches in their rankings. I don't think coaches (even Cael) are in a real strong position to pull athletes, because NIL is in play for NWCA All Star match participants (Flo has the broadcast rights).

Mark Hall loses 3-2 to Zahid Valencia in All Star match in 2017. Mark Hall, the undefeated returning 2016-17 National Champion and 2017-18 B1G Champion gets seeded 2nd at 2017-18 NCAAs. Coaches ranking, used in seeding, reported by Cael Sanderson to have considered the all star match result.

Right. Was top ranked NAIA 149 when Grand View won without him.

Tell Mark Hall that.

I don't think so. 149 NAIA champion. Try not to be so obvious a troll. Nico Megaludis wrestled 125 at PSU after Andrew Long was dismissed from the team.

Nice try, but he wrestled 133 at PSU. 125 at Iowa State.

Continuous learning

It's not quite Ali-Frazier. More like rubber-necking a train wreck.

Yeah, please use FFS in the future, so not to offend other's sensibilities . You act like you own this forum, or something, and can just say whatever you want, however you want. Don't be a Baby-Elon .

We'll likely never know. Coach Cael impresses me as one who likes to coach those whose primarily focus is becoming the best wrestling student athlete that they can be. Although he may be forgiving, I don't believe he would put up with behavior that detracts from the team, as individuals and a whole, being in the best position to accomplish their goals. I believe red flags during visit or interview, to discern whether Coach Cael would not want AJ, would likely have caused Penn State to take a firm pass. AJ would demand too much wasted energy of the negative kind.

No. See at Iowa Luther Open. Upper classmen are wrestling unattached. No more than 6 attached if one can't count it towards team's competition date.

I will defer to the people with the most experience of having shit talked about them.

Good thing Carter doesn't care what people in the peanut gallery think.

Nice non-denial denial. And thanks for donating to the NLWC.

They did and no Jacobi Teemer.

Seriously? Taking credit for membership contribution is a no lose sucker bet. Then again, P.T. Barnum did say there's a sucker born every minute.

Are we just talking wrestling now? Yes, in team of 35 wrestlers, 9.9 athletic scholarships will only go so far. I don't think the fifth year will make a material difference on the degree of sacrifice when it comes to share. I am all for member institutions increasing scholarships well above 9.9, if they can agree do so.

Consortiums formed for the primary reason of facilitating them on behalf of specific athletes or sports teams outside the purvue of institution-controlled athletic scholarships. So the student athlete can focus on student athletics. Northwestern is a funny choice to me as a example, because I imagine it to be one of the more, if note the most privileged universities with higher academic standards than other B1G universities. Exactly what are your litmus tests or other evaluation criteria? What moral codes or tenets are you basing them on? How do you weight the word student-athlete (90-10, 70-30, 50-50)? My impression is 50% is the absolute lowest you'd weight student).

1) They are still under scholarship. 2) N.I.L. opprtunities (whether for the elite or a consortium that targets a team more broadly). 3) Academic scholarships not tied to athletic participation for non-revenue sports. 4) The gap is made up not by money but willingness to sacrifice in pursuit of happiness, in terms of an achievement thru athletic competition.