Jump to content

1032004

Members
  • Posts

    6,626
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    10

Everything posted by 1032004

  1. Sealey should probably be his biggest target from PSU IMO
  2. For some reason I thought Fish was more of a low risk guy, am I wrong on that? I know Hipolito’s style may have encouraged some of the craziness there but it almost seemed like Fish was going for just as much crazy stuff as Hipolito (even early in the match before he got down big)
  3. OK so keep RPI, get rid of winning percentage
  4. Have to think that (and maybe RPI) is a big reason why VT didn’t send out Mullen against Hendrickson. Why even have winning % as a criteria? It’s also rewarding guys who have a weak schedule even without ducking.
  5. He did major the returning NCAA finalist as a true freshman before 3 pt takedowns
  6. Did he remove any teams this week?
  7. ^. Needs to work on his gas tank though
  8. I need to rewatch that 197 SV to see how close Smith was to getting the danger count(s). Also thought Fish may have been pinned on Hipolito’s first throw. But great showing by OSU.
  9. Well Schultz lost to Hendrickson, so not necessarily. Probably have to call this a duck though
  10. He’s been flipping recruits like crazy and will get more + more transfers. Might be the betting favorite for Forrest and Bassett currently.
  11. Maybe, although I’m sure high school results will still be the basis for a lot of recruiting which will still encourage holdbacks. But could also help kids that don’t end up getting scholarships or mucho NIL bucks not be in so much debt when they graduate.
  12. In addition to the other 10?
  13. No because I said I think he gets majored.
  14. 11 weights? I’m in!
  15. Very high chance those 7 will all be top 3 seeds. Taking a quick look at last year’s brackets, of the 30 1-3 seeds, I only see 4 that did not AA (Braeden Davis, Jackson Arrington, Julian Ramirez, and Yonger Bastida). So 87% of 1-3 seeds AA’d. There’s a small chance one of the 7 doesn’t AA, but IMO that chance is lower than 2 of the other 3 AA’ing
  16. I use one and it’s hit or miss, but yeah that’s the most annoying thing about using an ad blocker. For this particular article and I believe NY Post most of the time it just gives me a message to say “continue without supporting us.”
  17. Interesting development: 20 year old California man detained for allegedly plotting to commit a coordinated attack with Rupnow https://nypost.com/2024/12/19/us-news/california-man-detained-after-allegedly-plotting-coordinated-attack-with-wisconsin-school-shooter-natalie-samantha-rupnow/?utm_campaign=nypost&utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=social
  18. Who was paying for the private schooling?
  19. My understanding was this ruling only applies to Pavia…for now at least
  20. Agree. Although on the subject of X and this shooting, they are blocking searches for Rupnow or Samantha Rupnow. Did the same with Colt Gray (edit: who was also initially accused of being trans only for later evidence to come out suggesting that he was actually anti-trans)
  21. Both. They “wrestled” twice at CKLV. One 5-1 win for Schultz and one MFF for Schultz
  22. What’s the word on McGonagle and Wolak? With them our (particularly McGonagle as having a better chance of winning), 3.5 feels high
  23. A new product doesn’t automatically create new buyers, there has to be a demand for it. Just like creating a new weight class won’t automatically result in more participants. The two scenarios aren’t comparable anyway unless you’re talking about adding weights in total. As I said earlier, if anything you probably lose participants by losing a middle weight. Forget the official numbers but I think they’ve been posted previously showing that depth charts are pretty shallow at 197. I could certainly see guys who are 2nd string at 141/149 now become third string and then don’t think they’ll see much action so they quit. What’s your opinion on simply increasing 184 and 197? Seems like that would solve both issues of shrinking the gap to heavyweight as well as better aligning with the Olympic weights.
  24. Sorry but this is silly IMO. 1) A lot of the top heavyweights are “only” about 250, so a guy weighing even 198 is rarely giving up more than 50 pounds. 2) A guy weighing 198 is a 197. Basically the only people who have a decision to make are those walking around at about 225-230. Maybe 215-220 too but to your earlier post that would not be “the hardest cut on the team.” But going back to point 1 they’re rarely going to be giving up more than about 25 pounds. 3. There have been numerous numerous examples of guys bumping from 197 to heavyweight and doing even better than they did at 197. This is evidence we don’t need an additional upperweight. I’m on board with @Gus’s suggestion to shift both 184 and 197 upwards though.
  25. I’d do a sig bet on Mullen not getting pinned
×
×
  • Create New...