fishbane

Earlier in the match (1st period?) they went out of bounds and Maryland coach Clemson got up and ran over to the head table complaining the entire way. He got a warning from the official. In the moment I thought that Clemson was complaining about nothing and it reminded me of Starocci's twitter comments about Clemson last year. Later in the match when the official gave Arnold that stall call I thought that must be what Clemson was complaining about earlier. He must have complained that Arnold was pushing Smith about of bounds and that it should have been a stall call on Arnold. When the neutral out of bounds rule changed back in 2015 the official was given 3 options when the wrestlers go out of bounds in the neutral position.

125: #6 Luke Lilledahl dec #28 Joey Cruz 133: #7 Braeden Davis dec #3 Drake Ayala 141: #3 Beau Bartlett dec #31 Ryder Block 149: #4 Shanye Van Ness dec #2 Kyle Parco 157: #3 Tyler Kasak dec #1 Jacori Teemer 165: #1 Mitchell Mesenbrink TF #2 Mikey Caliendo 174: #2 Levi Haines dec #5 Patrick Kennedy 184: #1 Carter Starocci dec Angelo Ferrari 197: #4 Josh Barr Dec #1 Stephen Buchanan 285: #2 Greg Kerkvliet Dec #11 Ben Kueter PSU over Iowa 32-0 A little late. But I think I have the right answer.

I am talking about NTSB investigations. The goal of those Determine the facts, conditions, and circumstances relating to an accident; Determine one or more probable causes; and Issue safety recommendations to prevent or mitigate the effects of a similar accident The last item is really the most important, but can't be done without the other two steps. It seems like the first two were largely skipped over. Why Trump would spend so much time discussing DEI? He's largely skipped the first two steps and went straight to eliminating DEI as the answer. That's not productive. How? It seems inevitable that the flight paths of commercial and military aircraft's will intersect. It cannot be eliminated. This raises more questions than solutions. Why was the helicopter there? Was it? I heard that the controller was managing two stations/sectors at the time. Was that because 11 people were assigned to be working at the time of the accident and did not show up? I am skeptical of this. There is probably more to it. Is this a problem that needs fixing? If both helicopters and airlines are operating in the same area one person directing both might be needed to keep everyone on the same page. It should be separately investigated. May or may not be related. If an incompetent ATC ended up directing air traffic at a commercial airport then investigate how that happened. Too many assumptions are needed to blame DEI or anything in the hiring or training process at this point. The ultimate goal of the investigation should be to make recommendations to prevent future accidents. You are talking about the plane that was landed in the Hudson by Sully, right? I haven't seen the movie, but I am somewhat familiar with the incident. I don't believe the pilots were identified as one of the causes by the NTSB. The NTSB had real pilots in simulators attempt to make it to back LaGuardia and to Teterboro. Seven of the 13 simulations resulted in the plane making it to LaGuardia and one of the two Teterboro simulations were successful. Ultimately these simulations were unfair as the pilots executing them knew exactly what they had to do. When adding a 35s buffer to simulate the time a pilot would need to assess the situation in real life the pilot in the simulators not able to make it back to LaGuardia. The actual NTSB report had dozens of recommendations none of which were to hire genius pilots.

It highly likely to be irrelevant. The FAA hiring practices really only apply to one of the many people that may be involved in this - the ATC. Military helicopter pilots, airline pilots, mechanics, the military officers that set the helicopter's route the FAA hiring practices wouldn't apply to any of them, since none were hired by the FAA. It might apply to the controller, but if that individual was hired before DEI practices started under Obama or during Trump's last term when he suspended them it would be irrelevant. It would also be irrelevant if the controller was hired under Biden's administration and he would have been hired even after the powerful executive order Trump signed last week. Finally, even if the controller would not be hired today after the powerful executive order it would still be irrelevant if the controller was doing what any other controller in that position would do immediately before the accident. Why spend so much time talking about something that only has remote chance of being relevant? You even blame the helicopter pilots, which would make it germane, but you shouldn't be doing that. The goal of an investigation for something like this should be to make aviation safer not to assign blame. Sure if the helicopter pilots maintained visual separation the crash would not have happened, but don't put a "Period." on that. The next obvious question is why didn't they follow ATC's direction? If crash was caused by a mistake that a competent pilot could make then it is bound to happen again, so the process should be adjusted. If simply a case of an incompetent pilot then the question would be how did an incompetent pilot come to be operating a helicopter in the vicinity of DCA and what processes could be changed to prevent that in the future. In any case the failure will go farther than a single mistake by a pilot or ATC.

This wasn't a training flight as in someone learning to fly. The helicopter pilots were experienced and operating out of Fort Belvoir, which is ~12mi from DCA. There will be military helicopters flying around the Potomac. Too many important military things along that stretch of river.

Pretty sure Estrada doesn't have any dates left so he would need to burn his shirt to do this. This was discussed on FRL ahead of the Ohio State match and they said he was out of dates and predicted we'd see Teemer, which turned out to be the case.

He will answer this question pretty definitively in less than a week.

The question was which team benefited most from the transfer portal. Kerk used the transfer portal. PSU benefited. This seems like it would be on topic to me.

Yeah I don't know why the NWCA National Duals Championship Series or whatever they called it back in 2016 and 2017 died. I suspect it was all the other largely irrelevant matchups didn't generate interest. I think Iowa wrestled Edinboro in it one year and Edinboro were far off their 2015 peak by that point. Pretty sure Lugo upset Sorenson in that dual. Had no issues streaming that on Flo which was far different than the OSU-PSU streaming fiasco. It was pretty much PSU vs OSU both years.

Though he's never really given a direct reason why they don't do it, I think this might be why Sanderson did National Duals at ISU and hasn't at PSU. In the Big Ten PSU wrestles nearly all the top teams anyway. When the NWCA did the bowl style matchups in 2016 and 2017 they wrestled OSU who was ranked 2nd one year and 3rd the other year. It was the highest ranked team PSU had not yet wrestled. He probably sees having a 16 team tournament to at the end possibly get one quality dual that they wouldn't wrestle anyway as a waste of time. All the national title contenders are either in the Big Ten or the Big 12 anyway, but have the two team champs wrestle.

I don't think growing the sport is a good argument for National Duals. To me it's more about choosing a team champion in a more easily understood way. Most wrestlers couldn't tell you the exact scoring. Of the sports that you mentioned UFC, Boxing, and PGA Golf only the last one is contested in a tournament format. The first two have cards with a handful of select bouts that are much closer to duals than tournaments. How much would you estimate Bassett's social media presence has grown the sport? 20%, 10%, 5%, 1%?

I agree with all of this expect the part about national duals not producing a better definition of best team. Their NCAA has the advantage of all teams participating and a lot of matches to rank the teams, but I think there is a large element of randomness and draw dependency in the outcome. If two teams are close in team points I don't feel that confident in saying one team is better than the other. Last year 12.5 team points separated 2nd place Cornell from 8th place Ohio State. How confident would you be that the ranking Cornell>Michigan>Iowa State>Iowa>Arizona State>Virginia Tech>Ohio State is accurate? From a fan perspective having two teams wrestle a dual settles things in a more straightforward and satisfying manner. Take the 1998-1999 season as an example. Iowa won NCAAs with 100.5 team points. Minnesota was 2nd with 98.5. Iowa had three wrestlers in the final with 2 champs (Doug Schwab and T.J. Williams). Their 3rd finalist Lee Fullhart lost to Minnesota's Tim Hartung. What ultimately sealed the championship for Iowa was Stephen Neal beating Minnesota's Brock Lesnar in the final bout of the tournament, but you could just as easily point to T.J. Williams pinning UNC-Greensboro's Melvin Saunders in the first round of the tournament as the difference in team scores. Is Iowa a better team? They lost two duals to Minnesota that season. Once at the National Duals and the other a Big Ten dual in Iowa City. Edit - NWCA National duals were in Iowa City in 1999. MInnestora beat Iowa 2x in duals in their home gym.

The NCAA isn't that interested in wrestling as an institution. The outside entity that is trying to get a piece of the pie is the NWCA the coaches association. It was literally a majority of NCAA wresting coaches that voted for this back in 2012.

I attended the Big Ten tournament last year. There were open seats even in the finals. My group had extra tickets we couldn't give away. Not that many hardcore wrestling fans aren't flying across the country to watch Big Tens like NCAAs. Last year it was in MD a relatively easy trip from State College, PA where PSU sells out every home dual. And the Big Ten tournament is the exception of conference tournaments. The EIWA is set to be less compelling this year than last year with the split of the Ivy League.

Perhaps, but with at large bids and the increasing number of forfeits not only in the consolations but also the finals they may not be laughing a few years from now. Fans would only really miss one tournament. The rest are lightly attended and likely lose money. The Big Ten is the only conference that really needs a tournament. The Big 12 and ACC are small enough that they wrestle all the other teams already. An end of season tournament is superfluous as all these matches should have happened already. Back when the Big 12 only had 5 teams they would wrestle home and away duals to make a conference dual schedule with 8 duals. Why even have an individual tournament? Everyone should have wrestled everyone else 2x already - just use those results to pick the national qualifiers. To round out this proposal teams would wrestle a round robin of conference duals and wrestlers would qualify to NCAAs based on individual standings for each weight from the record in conference duals and an allocation to each conference. At large selections would be made. Participation in a min number of conference duals at the weight would be required. Since regular season duals would be in effect the NCAA qualifier this would incentive wrestlers to wrestle in duals so big matchups would be more likely to actually happen.

Yes the tournament later this year in Tulsa is way too early. On the Basch and the Brain podcast last week they discussed how to make national duals work ahead of the announcement. Willie seemed to think that the split season like the tennis pilot program is the answer. Wrestle a dual season in the first half of the year oct-dec and have national duals in Dec. Then move all the opens, invitationals and various individual tournaments to January and February and keep the individual post season unchanged in March. I don't think this is the answer. It's a pretty radical schedule adjustment and I think it would change the flow of the season too much. Everything kind of builds to March currently. There are a lot of big duals later in the year which leads into conferences and then NCAAs. Teams just don't wrestle tournaments in the second semester. I think this would create a lull in the schedule where the top teams pretty much sit their starters until the post season. Getting teams to wrestle tournaments after CKLV would be trying to convince OSU, ISU, ASU, Missouri, PSU, Michigan, Illinois, Lehigh, Cornell, VT, ect to change what they did this year. Sanderson at PSU was the only consistent hold out of the old formats. From a fan perspective this should happen mid to late February at the end of the season before conferences. If that can't happen then my choice would be to have it two weeks after NCAAs with the top 4 or 8 teams in the NCAA standings qualifying or eliminate the conference tournaments and have it two weeks before NCAAs.

I disagree. Having a National Duals in November makes no sense as Goodale points out. At least not with the current schedule. If this tournament in Tulsa is happening the middle of November how can you even pick the teams to invite? What is that based on? The first competition of the year was Oct. 31st this year. Presumable teams need some notice to make plans and set their schedule. Ideally a national dual meet championship would be the culmination of the season and the final dual of the year. Each team would have a chance to qualify assuming they win all their duals. By January you have some idea of where teams sit and who to invite. An up and coming team would have a chance to do something to get invited. If you are inviting teams in early November then you can't be basing that on any relevant results at all.

They held the Olympics without the top team this year. It worked okay. The thing is that the Olympics is a big event and has been or years. Can this get started or perhaps restart? without the top team? If I recall correctly the thing that sunk the national duals was back in 2011 when Iowa didn't participate. The tournament had bounced around the country, but had been at UNI for 5-6 straight years and wasn't losing money there. Then Iowa didn't attend and I'm sure it lost money. PSU didn't attend either, but Iowa was probably the bigger absence at the time. A series of format changes ensued and the tournament struggled to either break even or attract the top teams. The prize money might attract more top teams, but maybe not PSU. PSU's absence and the timing in November might struggle to grab fans attention. Those things and offering $1M in prize money might make it difficult to sustain.

Lol. Everyone looking out for themselves and no one with the authority to make everyone do anything. I suspect this format change will not fix the problems with the national duals.

PSU was up 20-0 at the break.

I thought Jesuroga retired. He would make 12. Bradley Hill also transferred to Oklahoma. Then the two Ferraris.

If you include the Ferrari bros this makes 11 wrestlers that were in the Iowa room last year that are now on rosters elsewhere.

I think the rule changed in 2019-2020. You use to have to mis most of two seasons to get the 6th year. They almost never give them out to the point that they were rarely even applied for. I think Eric Bradley was denied under the old rules. I think you're right that it now is a routine part of the medical hardship since the rule change. The criteria is participation in no more than 30% of competitions and the injury happens in the first half of the season. The Cornell dual was their 8th competition date of the year and there are 16 on Lehigh's schedule so it was in the first half, but if it happened this week maybe not. I guess the only thing that could really hang it up is if he gets medically cleared to compete before the end of the season, which he might. Finding a doctor to not clear him/having Crookham say things that would prevent the doctor from clearing him is probably trivial. Several wrestlers have received 6th year waivers in recent years Michael Kemerer, Boo Lewallen, Austin Gomez and Anthony Cassar to name a few, but before 2019 there aren't many. I think Noah Surtin is out for the year and would need a 6th year. Nagao if he out for the year would be in the same boat, but since he's not starting even if it weren't guaranteed the decision would be different than Crookham's.

Perhaps, but is wouldn't change the answer much in 2024. PSU had the highest NCAA medalist from the conference at 6 weights. In Iowa's record setting 1983 season they had 9 Big Ten champs and the highest NCAA placement from the conference at 9 weights. If you expand the conference to include all 2024 members then Iowa only had the highest placer at 8 weights. Could one of the 5-champ teams win a dual against the rest of the NCAA?

This question is functionally similar to "How many Big Ten Champs will Penn State have?" Especially since you have multiple wrestlers listed for the Big Ten team at some weights. Last year they had 5 champs, with Starocci not wrestling. Four of them and Starocci return. Still maybe it's more interesting than last year with Gable back, since he is likely to block Kerkvliet from repeating. Probably a very similar team performance. I'll say 5 champs 149-184 possibly a 6th at 197. PSU has more bonus point potential and takes the dual on bonus. Far less dominant than 1981-1986 Iowa when they had at least 7 champs/season and as many as 9 in 1983. Seven champs all but guarantees a dual victory.