flyingcement

Morrison with the major over backup Karapetyan (a good Armenian name by the way). 30-6 Bald Eagles going into the final match

Malachai Duvall of George Mason defeats Colin Fegley to bring their series against one another to a 2-2 draw. 26-6 Lock Haven

Stoltzfus with a clutch takedown to comeback and win 5-3 for Lock Haven who now lead 26-3

Evan Maag, of Notre Dame Green Pond, District 11, defeats Eric Alderfer of Lock Haven to put the first points on the board for George Mason. 23-3 and now 174 we have Pierce vs Stoltzfus

Connor Eck putting it on freshman JT Chance who wrestles in place of ranked DJ McGee. 15-2 after the 1st. Chance gets a takedown in the 2nd bringing the score back to 15-5. Chance looks tough on top and gets a stall call on Eck as he buries him into the mat. Another stall on Eck and we have 15-6. Chance gets another takedown in the third and now its 15-9! Third stall on Eck and its 15-10. Chance had an amazing comeback, but while its not enough, he avoided bonus. 23-0 for Lock Haven

Stonecheck gets the takedown, gets to work on top and earns a pin in 100 seconds. 20-0 Lock Haven in what is becoming a blow out

Let em up, take em down. Let em up. It's 15-4 in the 2nd. Another takedown makes it 18-4. Continues to stalk Higley. Easily gets another takedown after a release and Henson wins 21-5 2nd period tech fall. That is his 7th tech fall in a row. 14-0 in favor of Lock Haven after three matches

Wyatt Henson playing take em down and let em up with Nate Higley - a national qualifier last year at 149. Henson gets a third takedown in the first period plus three near fall. 12-2 in favor of Henson

Call stands Wittenberg escapes Stall all on Strickland but he holds on and wins 4-2 9-0 in favor of Lock Haven

Strickland starts down and escapes nothing further in the 2nd Wittenberg starts down in the third and escapes Strickland gets a takedown and its 4-1. Wittenberg wants a challenge and Beasley throws a brick

Brandon Wittenberg, transfer from Virginia Tech faces off against Gable Strickland at 133. Deep eye poke impacts Strickland early. Wittenberg apologizes and we are back in action. Both guys feel each other out as they lock up an we get into quite the scramble after Wittenberg gets into Strickland's legs. Close to a takedown for Wittenberg, but Strickland wriggles lose, and gets higher ground for an advantage position of his own. Ref finally calls stalemate. 0-0 going into the 2nd

Dragovich shoots with his head down and is easily taken down again by Noto on the counter. Noto hits a hazard tilt on Dragovich and gets four near fall points. Cranks him with an arm bar and gets the fall. 6-0 Lock Haven

Takedown Noto Escape Dragovich Dragovich gets to Noto's legs, but is takedown by Noto on the counter in Sasso like fashion. Escape Dragovich Stall called on Dragovich as he backs up out of bounds. 6-2 going into the 2nd period

Anthony Noto vs JB Dragovich at 125

For anyone looking for a little MACtion, the Lock Haven vs George Mason dual is being shown on the link below. It starts in about forty minutes https://psacsportsdigitalnetwork.com/golhu/

You're right. It's too late to edit l, but my rationalization for my mistake is that they get two team points deducted after that match due to excessive and violent celebrations

Sad that they are now clearly the worst team in the Big ten. They have a couple of solid guys, but it wouldn't surprise me if they didn't AA. This from a team who qualified the entire roster for nationals just several seasons ago

I wouldn't be surprised to see Alvarez upset Swiderski

Many thanks to @Gus for doing it the old fashioned way. I'll post up the article in here once they write it. That's the easy part.

Yeah I mean our family had a computer in the house since around 1992. It's actually astonishing how archaic the voting system is in spite of all of the innovations of the last several decades.

Presidents day is a bit useless to me - I'd be willing to sacrifice it for the sake of a federal voting holiday, but I get your point. Unfortunately there are games played between both parties with gerrymandering as well as voter suppression which do make me empathize with those that want an easier path to vote. I say sure - if you can verify your identify, and that you have conducted a basic level of research, that the path should be smooth and seamless for those folks.

I didn't even realize there was an active resistance (or promotion) of removing the party names. I am at the point now where I feel like voting should be a federal holiday - and that there should be a basic test done by a computer - to verify that the person has at least done a little bit of research. if you don't know what you're voting for, then what result should we expect? On the other hand I could see many people criticizing my idea as being biased and anti-democratic, but I don't really care.

I won't disagree - it may be a logical step to do that. I would say that I think most people know at the presidential level which candidate is in which party - but once it gets to the local level, many don't take the time to do the research, and vote on party. I've made a point of trying to research as much as I realistically can and I won't vote on any office if I don't have an informed opinion to provide

Scared to tell them as in - they will not vote for a third party candidate as a way of moving the party forward. The democrats are so scared of the republican alternative, and republicans scared of the democrat alternative - that instead of voting another similar but more accurate candidate which is not the primary D or R - they will just "hold their nose" and vote for the party. In doing that, they hide the information about what issues they think the party needs to take into consideration.

I don't think we should remove the party names from the ballot. What I think is happening is that both sides have been convinced that the other side is the worst possible thing that can happen to the country. And in doing that, we have people who believe they need to vote red or blue to protect us from the opposite. When people feel an existential crisis is at hand, they are more comfortable voting for a candidate with about 50% overlap in beliefs to help avoid that other person. And since we have been increasingly polarized ever since the 90s, I would say that we face a problem where the major parties don't even have the right information for how they should evolve, because their voters are too scared of telling them.