PencilNeck

Probably easy enough to shift one parent volunteer from the concession stand to do the weigh-in table since there will be a lower demand for nachos.

don't lose the first round of a tournament if you don't want to be making weight that many times. also, remember that now everyone is presumable wrestling at a more natural weight, so making weight shouldn't really be a chore at this point.

I was proposing 1 pound total until finals, not for each round. again, just an idea. skip the allowance alltogether if that's better you could do weight ins while you are on deck, not necessarily immediatly prior to match good athletes won't be missing weight, and if they do, they will learn to cut less. coaches and athletes would figure it out.

its just an idea to allow for fluctuations. Why is there allowance now in the first place? I'm also fine with it without the allowance, but we tend to weight our lightest of the day first thing in the morning, or after an intense workout. Make wrestlers carry extra ankle bands and put them on prior to getting to the mat. Boom, you just saved your theoretical 3 minutes. I dont think there would me many more forfeits once people figured out how to plan for this. We already see medical forfeits in tourneys...maybe matside weight in would decrease those.

Matside weight ins are a good idea. For tournaments, you could have an allowance for subsequent rounds (1 pound for second round through semis, maybe an additional half to full pound for finals?). People in power probably like the idea of cutting weight, so it will never happen though.

I think many took issue with his comments on TV after winning the NCAA title this past spring.

Lots of athletes do multiple sports in high school and focus on one on college. Lots of athletes do sports in high school, but don't continue through senior year (seniors are often the smallest class on a team). The attrition starts well before college. Not everyone even goes to college! I can see why wrestling might have the lowest number just by my intuition that wrestling is probably one of the least fun sports to be mediocre to poor at when competing against better athletes. In a team sport, if you suck, you can sit on the bench, and get some minutes when your team plays a shitty team. In track, if you suck, you can lose, but still have fun and set a personal best. In wrestling, if you suck, you'll just mostly lose.

Has Bono signed off on this change?

Hello my name is Jimmy Pop and I'm a dumb white guy I'm not old or new, but middle school, fifth grade, like junior high

absolutely. but when you look at a lineup and see an athlete who has been wearing your team's singlet for over a year, is he a transfer or a returner?

This is interesting, but wrestling is one of the easiest sports to find a practice space for. two wrestling mats rolled out takes up less space than a basketball court, and mats are pretty easy to transport given that the team can move their own stuff if necessary (back in middle school, we'd turn the cafeteria into a mat room every and then back every single day!). Not saying a temporary setup is sustainable long term, but for a season or so, not a big deal. For the sake of the student athletes, hopefully this all gets sorted out sooner rather than later.

How do we define transfer here? Some of those were past transfers, but if you started last year for a school and are going to start this year, you're a returner, not a transfer.

Lincoln, Rumsfeld, and Dennis Hastert were all wrestlers, and all three served in the US House of Representatives for Illinois. According to his wikipedia page, Hastert is the highest ranking elected official in U.S. history to serve a prison sentence.

I don't think an NCAA athlete should be betting on college sports, especially the football team at their own school. Presumably they could be privy to insider information, which makes this betting problematic. Also, in sports where athletes are underpaid, the availability of easy ways to wager is an issue, could be tempting to make a buck. These look like somewhat small bets, so I don't think he was doing anything unethical, especially as some have pointed out that this is totally legal now! Oh well, I guess losing your final year or whatever of eligibility is just the idiot tax for this situation. We all pay a version of that at some point for various mistakes.

I love the symmetry with the original thread that we could argue that for the 10 past years as of today that it’s 17 (counting 2020 committee awarded AA and HM AA), 14 (not counting HM, or skipping 2020 and going back to ‘13), or even 9 (nine individuals earning AA over that time, some multiple). but the answer for most of us here would be 12. And if the original argument that precipitated the non-bet was that UNI was that was good/crappy based on an over/under of 14 AA in 10 years, well, looks like they’re still doing okay.

Ban offered a wager to anyone (excluding any current Iowa wrestlers under 21) on the board that he could get them gambling by the end of the day. Nobody took the bait at first, but after he offered 50X odds, Bob Dole was all in. Apparently Bob wants to bring down the ban hammer, but is holding off for the time being in hopes of collecting.

I assume it's just a like a free year lease or something like that. Still probably worth good $$$, but not exactly giving away a luxury car/ loaded truck.

Excluding 2020 and going off of the media guide for 2014-2022 and +1 for 2023, I counted lower than 13; adding in 2013 to make it go over 10 seasons rather than years, I get higher than 13 (note that BB did not attempt to get in on the wager I offered when he made this reply)

Lots of off-topic here. Fact is that if the attached old discussion is accurate and complete, then there was absolutely no bet agreed to. Now, fast forward to present day (September 2023), I looked up UNI's All-Americans over the past 10 years, and the data is actually very interesting. Anyone want to guess how many they had? I'll provide multiple choice: a) 9 b) 12 c) 14 d) 17 I'll bet you $10 that you get this one wrong!

jross's analysis is very much correct. I don't know if I'd go so far as to say that BB weaseled anything though. Senator Dole should have not taken the bait to make a pointless (yet oddly high dollar) wager on easily verifiable trivia. I vote an unqualified not guilty, and shame on anyone for holding onto a grudge over this silly pissing contest for 11 years!

Does the truck have 4(th place)-wheel drive?

I think he might be a double-agent

It's a very small number on the men's side, and women's coaching jobs are (I assume) more prestigious than men's (former Illinois head coach, Justin Spring left a couple of years ago to be a women's assistant at Alabama, for instance). However, men's college gymnastics is closer to the pinnacle of the sport than the women's mostly due to the ages at which athletes in those sports peak. An NCAA men's meet has more future and current national team members than a women's meet would. Also, the men's coaches have to know six events while the women only need to know four

For Track, you could add Pat Henry from Texas A&M Thinking of Oklahoma gymnastics, is the men's coach even more accomplished than the women's?