flyingcement

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.

I think that the data is whats important. Republicans and Democrats have formed their parties around a loose agenda of what they expect that voters care about. One of the primary sources of voter intelligence for prospective politicians are the actual votes from last time around. If you feel that the Republican and Democratic platforms are unsuitable to serve our country, it is your duty to vote for candidates which stand for the things that you believe are missing. That's how democracy works if people do it correctly. If someone votes for red or blue because they want to be aligned with a winner, they don't understand what they are doing.

Brother 2019 that's the same as me. Some say it was the boards best ever recruitment class

Shout out to American University's Max Leete who wrestles with extreme visual impairment

It's not relevant for a single voter in the slightest.

If anyone wonders why we will have two atrocious candidates again, you can blame anyone who ever voted for party over person. These people are idiots

Whether or not they have a chance of winning is entirely irrelevant. A vote is just information sent from a person to the political world about they care about. It's up to politicians to incorporate those views into their platform or not. It saddens me how many people truly don't get it

two total I guess: one to Dean and one to @nhs67

Beard was beating Dean and the gap was widening in the room. Beard was big man on campus but graciously gave the starting spot to Dean out of sympathy. Whenever Beard sees Dean in public, he gives him a noogie

Wrestlestat has started to show new entrants to the transfer portal for next year. https://www.wrestlestat.com/transferportal 125: Dominic Chavez, Presbyterian, Best wins over Anthony Molton X2 and Drew West; Two years remaining of eligibility 125: Zac Jacaruso, George Mason, Best win over Anthony Knox (while in HS); has not yet wrestled a college match 184: James Lledo, Pittsburgh You can view the rest on the link above. Just noticed they started adding to the list after it had been blank for quite some time