fishbane

It was a great performance by Caliendo. I got that one wrong. Had Amine been wrestling with the mask leading up to the dual or was that new too?

It is often inconvenient to give receipts that don't match up with public statements. Musk pretended to be turned the homes on the desperate housewives set into solar powered homes back in 2018. Back in January he was pretended to be an elite Path of Exile 2 player. Might he be pretending to cut $1 trillion from the budget now? I didn't say it was impossible for it to be true, just that it shouldn't be believed without receipts. After all the public statements Musk has made that were later found to be either outright false or gross exaggerations, only someone that is incredibly gullible would take his claims at face value.

Mayhaps, but when Musk initially said he expected they could cut at least $2 trillion from the Harris-Biden budget that was an annual budget. If it turns out to be an accumulation of $2 trillion in savings over 5-6 years he would have under delivered by a substantial margin.

Without receipts they can claim whatever they want. Elon Musk often does this in his business dealings. Fake battery swaps, taking Tesla private, solar homes built with non-functional solar shingles, the roadster, full self driving, the Hyperloop... this list is long.

I didn't intend to imply that you thought they were the same. It was more to point out that they were different so however late Brands allowed the 133 wrestle off to happen last year this probably need more lead time from Big Tens. I recall that 133 spot being settled late and Teske being a bit of a surprise at the time, but looking back maybe it wasn't. Teske wrestled the last two weeks of duals and he was #14 in the preseeds that came out the Tuesday before Big Tens. I'd guess a final wrestleoff would have happened between the last dual and the Monday before Big Tens.

The Schriever-Teske roster battle is a little different than the hypothetical situation here. Both of those guys had certified long before Big Tens and had competed at the weight that year. This would be more like the Joe Smith-Chandler Rogers wrestle off at the end of Cowboy Slim Fast. I doubt it's possible. For it to be possible Arnold would have had to weigh in light for the Minnesota dual too. Nelson Brands-Patrick Kennedy is likely the only 174lb wrestle off.

Isn't the rule that you can lose 1.5%/week? Arnold wrestled 184 against Northwestern on 2/16. Big Tens start on 3/8. That's only 20 days. He have had to weigh in light on 2/16 for it to be possible. Like 181.5 or less. Even then I think he'd have to pass a hydration test the first time he weighs in below 184, so it would be risky to do that at the big ten weigh ins. Ideally you'd want him to do that before the tournament. I don't think Big Tens is the kind of tournament where if he misses weight or makes weight but is dehydrated so fails certification you can just weigh in another guy and wrestle someone else. So he'd probably need to be even lighter at Northwestern for it to be practicable. Finally for fairness you'd like Arnold down to weight for a wrestle off with the other guys (Brands and Arnold) on weight and ahead of the tournament. Making him weigh in on weight ahead of his decent plan wouldn't seem fair to him and allowing him to wrestle off with a weight allowance doesn't seem like it would be fair to Kennedy/Brands.

Brands "We're going to put the guy on the mat that makes the most sense."

If he's medically cleared to compete now isn't a medical redshirt off the table?

PSU lost at 133lbs.

PSU beat MSU 55-0 and MSU won dual over AU by a score of 20-12. PSU also blew out Maryland who blew out AU 37-(-1). I think you only take the under on 55.5 if PSU is going to be sitting more than 1 guy.

Why do people take Elon Musk's claims seriously? Sure he will cut the budget by $1 trillion. The same people that believe that probably believe that he is an elite Diablo/Path of Exile player.

I think only a very gullible person would take a figure from Elon Musk as exact or even legitamate. He has a history of making exaggerated claims/promises that either never happen or are only delivered in part. Some claims made by Musk over the years He had secured funding to take Tesla private. The Cybertuck would be available in late 2021 and the base model would cost under $40k. The redesigned Tesla Roadster would be released in 2020... 2021... 2022... 2023... 2024... 2025? The houses on the Desperate Housewives set were converted to Solar powered houses using Solar City's solar shingles. The hyperloop. Full Self Driving. I am sure his crack team will find some actual waste, fraud, and abuse in time. The waste/fraud/abuse they have frantically compiled over the past two weeks is likely as useful as the mini-sub his crack team at Space X hastily slapped together over a weekend some years ago.

Early? The PSU-AU dual is tomorrow. Do they normally wait until the day of the dual to release odds and start taking bets? I've never placed a wager with a sports book, but it would have guessed they get released more than 24hrs before the event.

Draft Kings does't have a line for this dual. The only one I see this week is OSU-Iowa.

This looks like it could be the most lopsided D1 dual of the year. The largest margin of victory between two D1 teams this season was Penn State-Michigan State which ended 55-0 in PSU's favor. Wrestlestat has MSU ranked 55 in their dual rankings and American is 4 spots lower at 59. MSU defeated AU earlier this season 20-12. AU and PSU have three common opponents this season; Lehigh, Maryland, and Michigan State. PSU defeated Lehigh 36-3, Lehigh defeated AU 36-6 PSU defeated UMD 35-10, UMD defeated AU 37-(-1) PSU defeated MSU 55-0, MSU defeated AU 20-12 So PSU was 33 points better than Lehigh who were 30 points better than AU implying a difference of 63 points between PSU and AU. PSU was 25 points better than Maryland who were 38 points better than AU also implying a difference of 63. Finally PSU was 55 points better than MSU who were 8 points better than the AU implying a difference of 63 points between the Nittany Lions and the Eagles. Can they keep it under 60?

I mean it's not impossible that Caliendo gets the major, but I think it's more likely that Amine wins than Caliendo scores bonus. In 6 years of NCAA competition Amine has conceded a single bonus point.

Roderick's streak had two draws 82-0-2. The longest win streak inside it was only 37. 1958-1959 9-1 (1 win streak) 1959-1960 14-0 (15) 1960-1961 8-0 (23) 1961-1962 12-0 (35) 1962-1963 11-0-1 (win streak snapped 47 unbeaten) 1963-1964 10-0-1 (58 unbeaten) 1964-1965 14-0 (72) 1965-1966 13-1 (unbeaten streak broken at 84) Iowa also had an 84 match unbeaten streak under Brands 83-0-1. Inside that streak there was a 69 match winning streak (3rd longest in D1). 2007-2008 21-1 (14 consecutive wins) 2008-2009 24-0 (38) 2009-2010 23-0 (61) 2010-2011 15-0-1 (Win streak broken at 69, 77 unbeaten) 2011-2012 14-4 (unbeaten streak broken at 84)

Right! Spey was probably talking about the record for a single coach and the answer is Sanderson.

I think the overall number has already been settled thoroughly by JB and others. I had looked into this before the start of the season and the OSU media guide had 76 as their record win streak. I checked other D1 programs and that was the longest I could find. One thing to note about that streak is that is spanned the tenures of two different head coaches. So the longest dual winning streak by a single head coach at the D1 level is 69. Some of the references articles may have been said the longest streak by a coach and not a program. Another detail is that the longest unbeaten streak by a team (or coach) in D1 is slightly longer at 84. OSU did this 1959-1966 and Iowa equalled it under Tom Brands. I think Iowa's steak had a higher winning percentage as it only included 1 draw and OSUs included 2. It's interesting that Iowa's last loss before starting their 84 match unbeaten streak was to OSU. The tie that prevented them from claiming the winning streak record was against OSU. And the loss that ended the unbeaten streak was also against OSU.

Lamer lost last week 2/7.

It would also remove the argument for not having starters wrestle in season tournaments. This would make UMDs loss at 157 last night the seeding criteria rather than the match at CKLV. The conference tournaments had value which has been diminishing over time. In the past a wrestler used to have to perform at a conference tournament to make NCAAs. Now that is not the case. Since the adoption of national wild cards we've seen multiple wrestler go 0-2 and either not take the mat at all or "wrestle" 1-3s and still qualify. From a fan interest and financial perspective only one conference tournament really makes sense every year and that's the Big Ten tournament. Even in that we've seen large numbers of forfeits in the consolations and more recently the finals too. Last year even with the new rule that a med forfeit in a tournament would count as a loss on a wrestlers record this was still happening. I agree with a lot of what you wrote on conferences. I'd prefer them to be more balanced too, but possibly a little smaller than your proposal. If conference duals were to replace the conference tournament I'd like to see a full round robin where each team wrestles every other team in a dual. With 14 team conferences 13 duals means a lot of travel and eats up too much schedule. Even if it doesn't replace the conference tournament I think wrestling every other team in the conference is a plus. As it stands we aren't guaranteed to see Iowa-PSU, Iowa-Michigan, Iowa-Minnesota, Iowa-Nebraska, ect every year. And who cares about 9th and 11th place matches at conferences to decide automatic qualifiers? Smaller more balanced conferences would eliminate/reduce them. Unfortunately Football determines the conferences and all other sports are stuck with it.

It wouldn't make sense to exclude starters from them. Is the NCAA or tournament director going to determine who the starter is? They are still an efficient way for teams from small conferences to wrestle multiple Big ten/12 teams. It's possible it was done for those reasons, but if that's the case he's likely to be disappointed. It's also possible that Miller sustained some kind of injury in the past week and Clemson was bemoaning the lack of defined seeding criteria no because it would give him insight as to how this may affect his wrestler's seed. Supposing Miller gets the 1 seed then there are really only two candidates for the 2 seed. Kasak who has only lost to Miller and Blaze who also only has lost to Miller (assuming he beats Taylor). The other should get the 3. The 4 and 5 seeds go to Taylor and Teemer. Do you have Teemer falling all the way to the 6? I don't think that is likely with his win over Askey last night. If Miller loses he might not even fall to 4/5. He still has the win over Kasak so he might only be the 2 seed (Blaze 1, Kasak 3) which would only put him on the same side as both Teemer and Kasak if Teemer is somehow the 6 seed which is unlikely. Same if he's the 3 seed with Blaze and Kasak ahead of him. I think it takes some chaos for him to be 4/5. Like he loses to Blaze who then loses to Taylor. The order is probably Kasak, Taylor, Blaze, Miller, Teemer. The risk vs reward doesn't seem worth it to throw away the dual and a winning season. The lack of defined seeding criteria makes it less likely to work and more unpredictable. If the coaches perceive the top two wrestlers to be Kasak and Teemer as it seems you do, then they will likely find a way to keep them on different sides. I've been in college seeding meetings like this before - no defined criteria. It's funny how a coach will make a case for their guys to get top seed one minute and then after it goes to someone else they pivot and now their guy should be 4 because the wrestler they wanted to avoid is definitely getting 2 or 3.

I wouldn't assume this was a duck. Maryland lost this dual 14-23. If Brown wrestled and won it's 17-18. Not wrestling hands the dual to Purdue and with a win at 157 Maryland is still in it. Not winning this dual is the difference between a winning season for the Terps and I don't think a loss for Brown significantly changes his postseason outlook. I don't think in season tournaments should be eliminated they serve an essential purpose. It would be nearly impossible for non-starters to accrue significant matches and they are an efficient way for a team/wrestler to compete against multiple opponents. If you want to reduce ducking in Conference duals then eliminate the conference tournament and instead determine if the team gets a national qualifier at a weight based on the teams record in conference duals at that weight. The number of allocations each conference has at a weight is based on rpi/coaches poll. Wild cards round out the field.

Joe Smith was undisciplined to come into the season up at 174. If he came into the season at 165 then they likely settle that roster spot early. Joe Smith likely wins the spot and when the December bump up happens it's Rogers wrestling 174 and there are fewer moving parts when Weigel returns. Geer goes down and you ask Jacobe Smith where he wants to wrestle and give him a wrestle off at either 174 or 184. With all the bumping that happened giving the 165lb loser a second wrestle off could have set off a cascade of wrestle offs the week before Big 12s. The end result could have been multiple guys cutting weight to ultimately compete at the original higher weight. Probably all them wouldnt like how it was handled. I think early February when Weigel's returning you ask them all where they want to wrestle. If someone's dropping then decent plans put that 3-4 weeks out and you let everyone know they will only be allowed to wrestle off at one weight on weight in 3-4 weeks.